I DATE DUE Inswaol.library.usyd.edu.au/data/pdfs/22442_ID_Bairstow... · 2015-02-02 · back-up facilities in the form of site clearance and survey, earth-moving equipment and the

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Q930

SAl

v. 1

NEWCASTLE LUMBER YARD

1989 E:x.ca.va.t.;on

Report.

Damaris Bairstow, MA., LLB. ,PHD.

for

Meredith Walker, Heritage Planning Consultant,

The Heritage Council of New South Wales

and

Newcastle City Council.

August. , 1 989

Q930

BAI

v. 1

I I I I I I I I I

DATE DUE I I

i I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I

_,

S U M M.A. .H. Y

.Jointly sponsored by the Nt>W Heritage Council and t .he

Council of the City of Newcastle, the excavation of

Newcastle's convict lumber yard again received titate-wide

media coverage as more exciting discoveries were made.

Keaders of Heritage Conservation News will recall that in

198'7 the Heritage Council funded a short. excavat.ion in

the nort.h-west. sector of t .he site after the accidental

finding there of a few small section of convict brick

paving. The excavation revealed part of the brick and

rubble paved floor of an industrial forge, a brick path

leading from it, an associated convict-built brick drain

and a well. As a result a Permanent Conservation Order

was placed on the site.

Meredith Walker, Heritage Planning Consultant, has been

commissioned to prepare a Conservation Plan for the site

which includes two late nineteenth century buildings

which are also subject to Permanent Conservation Orders.

The 1989 excavation was designed to provide additional

information of surviving sub-surface features upon which

to formulate that plan.

The excavat.ion was direct.ed by Dr. Damaris Bairstow who

ran th,::o 198 7 dig. ::>he was assist.ed by archaeologist.s

~iobhan Lavelle and P,::oter Legzdins and a host. of

volunt,::oers. As in 198 7, t .he people of Newcastle again

turn,::od up in droves to help. lt is estimated that

between them volunteers gav,::o over 250 days , well over a

working y,::oar, unearthing their and Australia's heritage.

Tours conducted on two consecutive ~undays attracted

anoth,::or 1200 people to the site.


Trenches were sunk to sample the unknown parts of t.he

the south-east. and

evidence but the

site. the north-east,

Each yielded convict

remains were found in

barracks block built in

have burnt down in 1851.

the south-west,

about. 1816 which

the sout.h-west ..

most exciting

the site of a

was report.ed to

Up to the time of the excavation it had been thought that

all convict structures in the lumber yard were timber and

would yield only fragile remains. Accordingly there was

great excitement when, on the second Saturday of the dig,

the top of a brick wall clearly of convict. workmanship

was discovered and excitement grew as course after course

of the wall was revealed.

The wall is that of an extension to the barracks thought

to have been built in about 1820. 1 t survives t.o a

height of over a metre above 800mm. footings. There is

clear evidence on both sides of t.he wall of the havoc

wrought by the 1851 fire but it is equally clear that the

building did not burn down. Gut.ted by the fire it was

left abandoned in an area notorious for sand storms.

Sand gradually built. up against the walls in some parts

causing collapse but this section of the wall was simply

buried. When redevelopment took place late in the

century the site of the early buildings had been

forgotten. The newcomers built on top leaving the convict

remains undisturbed.

The north wall of the annex and the west wall of the

original barracks were also uncovered. They have fallen

or been robbed above floor height but the footings

survive. !t is now thought that the whole barracks block

survives, at least in an archaeological sense, which

makes it one of the most important historical discoveries

in Australia to date. There is nothing, not. in ::.>ydney,

Parramat.t.a or on Norfolk lsland, thl!' only areas

contemporary with t.he Nl!'wcastle lumber yard, to compare

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

II II I

'I I I

I I I

yard, to compare with the Newcastle s i t.e. Coupled wi t.h

the discoveries in 1987, the Newcastle lumber yard is the

most. intact early convict. workplace in Aust.ralia.

¥urthermore, apart from the convict breakwater the fabric

.of which lies deep inside the modern breakwater which

links Nobbys to the mainland, it is t.he only surviving

evidence of one of the major convict establishments of

its period. 1 t is hoped that. furt.her excavation will be

undertaken in the near future.

On a lesser note but providing a rare glimpse into theo

lives of those who were to live in East Newcastle later

in the century was the discovery of the skeleton of a dog

which had been buried beneath a coal scuttle in a back

yard. Though st. ill young, this household pet had so

endeared itself to the family as to give rise to

ceremonial mourning.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I

I I I I I

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

¥irst and foremost tribute must be paid the Heritage

Council of New !::iouth Wales which has actively supported

the investigation and conservation of the Newcastle

Limber Yard since the accidental discovery four years ago

of a single convict brick. The Heritage Council financed

the original excavation of the north-west sector of the

site. That excavation established that convict evidence

survived. As a result. t.he Herit.age Council imposed a

Permanent Conservation Order on t.he whole site thereby

ensuring its availability for further investigation.

Since that time the Heritage Council has offered to each

successive owner funds t.o assist that investigation and

has jointly

formulation

funded

of a

the present

Conservation

excavat.ion

Plan to

and

which

the

the

excavation was geared.

Secondly recognition should be given to the Council of

the City of Newcastle for acting upon the Heritage

Council's recommendations immediately government

intention to transfer the land to the Council was

announced. The Council committed itself to the remaining

half of the funds required even before that intention was

brought int.o effect. ln addition the Council afforded

back-up facilities in the form of site clearance and

survey, earth-moving equipment and the provision of a

works caravan to act as site office. Without this

additional help and the willingness of the Council

employees sent to assist., the excavat.ion could not. have

proceeded.

To acknowledge all those in Newcastle who have kept the

issue alive and in public awareness over the last. two

years would be to provide a considerable cast list.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

·' ... - ~; ·- .. , ____ - ·

Council front-end loader and du.p trucks clearing debris

Sufficient, perhaps, to select the foremost amongst them,

Dr. John w. Turner of Newcastle University, the

discoverer of the convict brick who has also provided the

historical information on which the excavation was based.

Lastly thanks must be given to the volunteers who

laboured on site, often in appalling weather conditions,

day after day. To those who returned time and again, in

particular Alan and Myrl Skinner and H.on Gallagher who

missed no single day and who worked on even after the

excavation had officially ended, special tribute should

be offered. Volunt.eers between them provided over 250

working days, well over a working year, of unpaid labour.

This amazing contribution was the major reason the

excavation's success.

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

CONTENTS

Summary

Acknowledgements

List of Figures ................................. -........ 3

List. of Appendices ...................................... 6

1 • Statement of Heritage Significance ................. 7

2. Summary of Resu 1 ts ................................. 9

2.1 The 1818 barracks block ....................... 9

2.2 Location of the lumber yard .................. 11

2.3 Depth of convict remains & overburden ........ 13

2.4 Aboriginal evidence .......................... 18

3. The Archaeological Future ......................... 19

3. 1 Archaeological potential ..................... 19

3.2 Archaeological constraints ................... 19

3.3 Interpretation of the site ................... 20

3.4 A plan for future archaeological investigation ...... 21

4. Remote Sensing as an Aid to Excavation .......... 24

4.1 Resistivity testing .......................... 24

4.2 Sub-surface radar ............................ 25

5. Recommendations in the Event of Future Excavation ......... 26

5.1 Site office & laboratory space ............... 26

5.2 Training of volu~teers ....................... 27

5.3 Conservation advice .......................... 28 5.4 Aboriginal relics ............................ 29

5. 5 Revetment wa 11 s .............................. 29

5.6 Security fencing ............................. 29

5.7 Mechanical excavation ........................ 30

6. Introduction and Background Research .............. 31

6.1 Introduct.ion ................................. 31

6.2 Site setting & description ................... 31

I I I I

II I I

i I


6.3 Historical background ........................ 32

6.4 Previous archaeological investigation ........ 34

6.5 Archaeological strategy ...................... 34

7. Personnel and Publicity ........................... 36

7.1 Volunteer programme .......................... 36

7.2 The professional team ........................ 37

7 . 3 Med i a 1 i a i son ................................ 38

7.4 Site tours ............. · ...................... 38

8. Methode 1 ogy ....................................... 4 i

8. 1 Fie 1 d methode 1 ogy ............................ 41

8.2 Laboratory methods ........................... 42

9. The Excavation . .................................... 44

9. 1 Convict brick paving ......................... 44

9.2 Area 1 ........................................ 45

9.:3 Area 2 ....................................... 54

9.4 A rea 3 ...•.•.......•..•..•.•.•.......•....... 7 6

9.5 Backf i 11 i ng . ................................. 82

10. Analyses and Interpretations ...................... 84

10.1 Comparison of sand units ..................... 84

10.2 Area spatial distribution .................. 85

10.3 Area 2 spatial distribution .................. 86

10.4 Area 3 spatial distribution .................. 90

10.5 Analysis of base marks & coins ............... 93

1 0. 6 Socia 1 status ................................ 94

N~ea.st "1 e Luw.ber Yard '1 989 2


LIST OF FIGURES

1. West wall & eaves drop 1816 barracks facing

north . ............................. 9

2. West barracks wall facing east.showing robbed south return ...................... 1 0

3. West barracks wall, detail of mortar .............. 12

4. West barracks wall, detail of render .............. 12

5. Plan of lumber yard, 1840s ........................ 14

6. Lumber yard site, 1989 ............................ 15

7. Site plan showing excavated areas ................. 16

8. Area 2, Unit 208. Skeleton of a young dog ......... 17

9. Archaeological zoning plan ........................ 22

10. Volunteers excavating Area 3, 25 June, 1989 ....... 36

11. Volunteers excavating Area 2, 9 July, 1989 ........ 37

12. Dr. John Turner with site tour, 2 July, 1989 ...... 39

13. Meredith Walker with site tour, 9 July, 1989 ...... 40

14. Convict bricK paving in Bond Street ............... 45

1 5. Newcast 1 e, 1 906 . .................................. 46

16. Mechanical clearance of overburden, Area 1 ........ 47

17. Area 1 facing west. Unit 102 ...................... 47

18. Area 1, Quadrats CD6-7. Concrete blocks ........... 48

19. Area 1, Units 101, 104 & 105 ............... ~ ...... 49

20. Area 1 at end of excavation ....................... 51

21. Area 1, plan.of excavation ........................ 52

22. Area 1, south section ............................. 53

23. Lumber yard. Detail from a sketch by Sophia Campbell c.1820 ......................... 54

24. Vo 1 unteers working in Area 2 ...................... 56

25. Area 2. Collapse near sump ........................ 56

26. Scraping back Area 2 .............................. 57

27. Volunteers excavating Area 2, 24 June, 1989 ....... 58

28. Area 2, Unit 208 facing north. Coal scuttle ....... 59

29. Area 2, Unit 208 facing east. Detail of dog's ske 1 eton ....... 59

30. Area 2, Quadrats DE10. Wall (Unit 226)

3


facing north ........ 61

31. Area 2, Quadrats OE1. Wall (Unit 226) facing west ......... 61

32 Area 2, Quadrats 05 & 16 facing north. Sump & drain soon after discovery, 2 July, 1989 ... 62

33. Area 2, Quadrat 05. Sump facing west .............. 62

34. Area 2, Quadrat 05. Sump facing north ............. 63

35. Area 2, Unit 215, Quadrats OE1. Hoop iron ......... 63

36. Area 2, Quadrats OE1 facing west. Barracks wall (Unit 226) & eaves drop (Unit 227) ...... 64

37. Area 2, Unit 218, Quadrat E10. Burnt timber ....... 65

38. Area 2, Unit 222, Quadrat E10 & blackened section of wall (Unit 226).facing east .. 66

39. Area 2, Unit 222, Quadrat 010 facing south-east. Fire damage ... 66

40. Area 2, Quadrats OE10 facing east. Base of wall (Unit 226)showing blackened section ..... 67

41. Area 2, Quadrats OE13 facing west. Robbed wall (Unit 229) ..... 68

42. Area 2, Quadrat 010 facing east. Blocked window (Unit 230) ... 70

43. Area 2, Quadrat Oi3 facing north. West end of north return wall (Unit 228) .... 71

44. Area 2, Quadrat 010 facing north. East end of north return wall (Unit 228) .... 71

45. Area 2, Quadrat 010 facing east. North end of annex wall (unit 226) showing robbed

return wall .... 72

46. Area 2. North section ............................. 73

47. Area 2. South section ............................. 74

48. Area 2. Plan of excavation ........................ 75

49 Area 3, Unit 302, Quadrats A3-4 ................... 77

50. Area 3, Unit 303, Quadrat A6. Artefacts in situ ... 77

51. Area 3, Unit 306, Quadrat B6 facing north-east. Pressed brick .. 78

52. Area 3, Unit 305, Quadrats AB5 facing south. Convict brick scatter .... 79

53. Area 3 facing east. Overhang above convict evidence ....... 80

54. Area 3. South section ............................. 81

55. Area 2. Backfilling with front end of back-hoe .... 82

56. Area 2. Volunteers trying to protect barracks wall (Unit 226) ... 83

4


57. Bar chart showing distribution of iron Units 109 & 110 ... 86

58. Bar chart showing distribution of iron in proportion to matrix weight, Units 109 & 110 ... 87

59. Bar chart showing distribution of brick Unit 212 .. 88

60. Bar chart showing distribution of glass Unit 212 .. 89

61. Bar chart showing distribution of household china & glass & personal items Unit 302 ... 90

62. Bar chart showing distribution of household china & glass & personal items Unit 303 ... 91

63. Bar chart showing distribution of household china & glass & personal items Units 302 & 303 ... 92

Note: Unit photographs appearing in Appendix 2 are not included.

N~wcast~e Lu~ber Yard ~989 5


LIST OF APPENDICES

1. Media coverage. 2. Description of stratigraphic units.

3. Analysis of stratigraphic units. 4. Unit/Artefact weight distribution.

5. Analyses of artefacts. 6. The MINARK Scientific Database system.

7. Catalogue of finds.

8. List of archival records.

9. List of volunteers. 10. List of archival records not included in this

report.

6


1- STATEMENT OF HERITAGE

SIGNIFICANCE

i.1 The site is potentially of world heritage

significance

1.2

There is a growing interest throughout former

European colonies ( in particular USA, Canada and

South Africa) in colonisation from the viewpoint of

the colonist. This is seen in the foundations of

the colony and in the changes which occurred as the

colonist gradually adapted his European-conditioned

ways to achieve survival and finally success in the

new and different world in which he found himself ..

Australia's

Most of

origin lies in convict transportation.

that heritage has been destroyed. The

Newcastle Lumber Yard is the only known site in

Australia

a broad

retain

to retain evidence of early convictism on

scale. Thus it is the only known site to

evidence of Australia's colonial foundation.

The site is of national heritage significance.

The Newcastle

national level

Lumber Yard should be viewed at a

established in 1805/8 and virtually fully

developed by 1820,

contemporary only

Island and Hobart.

the

with

similar nature survive

Newcastle Lumber Yard is

Greater Sydney, Norfolk

No known structures of a

in any of these areas.

no site of a similar

in any of the

nature is

other

known to survive

major convict

establishments of a later period, viz., Port

7


1.3

1.4

1.5

Macquarie,

Island.

Morton Bay, Port Arthur or Norfol k

the site marks the first indl~strial workshop in

Australia's industrial capital.

The site is of State significance

the Newcastle Lumber

heritage

Yard coincides with Governor

Macquarie's term of office and therefore with the

Macquarie building period in Sydney. Lime for

mortar and cedar were prepared on this site for use

in such buildings as Hyde Park Barracks, the Mint

Building, St. James Church and the Macquarie

extensions to First Government House.

The site is of local heritage significance

the Newcastle Lumber Yard marks the birthplace of

industry in Australia's major industrial city. Here

were forged and maintained the picks, shovels and

other equipment for use in Australia's first coal

mines in what was to become Australia's major coal

town. Here were the first iron forges in what was

to become Australia's major steel city.

The site is of Aboriginal heritage significance.

Newcastle Harbour is virtually man-made.

survive

Few traces

of its original inhabitants on the

foreshore. The fact of survival makes this a site

of significance to Aboriginal heritage.

The presence within the Lumber Yard curtilage of an

Aboriginal camp site enhances the heritage value of

the whole site. The site now encapsulates

Australia's histt:\ry, not merely the history of its

European settlers.

8


2. SUMMARY OF RESULTS

2.1 The 1818 Barracks Block.

The most sensational result of the 1989 excavation was

the discovery of the brick-built east wail of the 1818

convict barracks standing to a height of over a metre

above 800mm. footings (Figure 1). This building is

Figure 1. West wall and eaves drop, 1818 Barracks wall facing west. (scale at 250mm. intervals)

recorded as having burnt

archaeologicai evidence of building did not burn

abandoned, it gradualiy

down in 1851 .

the fire, it

down but was

decayed and

11 _....,

While there

is clear that gutted.

eventually

~ · ;.~,.

,...,r •t .I" .•

" ' )

was

the

Left

was

9

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I.

I I I I

covered

nineteenth

in sand

century,

for which

was notorious.

East Newcastle, in the

The northern return of this wall has either collapsed or

been robbed above the footings

Figure 2 West barracks wall facing east showing robbed southern return. (scales in 250 & 100mm. intervals)

(Figure 2) as has the west

wa 11 of this room, the original east wall of the

co 11 apse during the

wai 1 survived to an

Thus there is no

stand to the same

barracks. On the other hand, minor

back-fill suggested that the main

even greater height to the south.

reason to suppose t .hat ali walls

height.

I I I I

I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

The bricks, apparently of local manufacture, are clamp

clay and fired sandstocks. They are made of ill-pugged

in the main are underfired. Bonding is with orange sandy

mortar containing a small amount of shell lime (Figure 3)

which provides little adhesion. Even during the brief

ten days during which the upper courses were exposed

deterioration became noticeable as the mortar dried out.

Conservation problems, therefore, are considerable.

The wall was originally protected by a thick (up to

15mm.) coating of shell render of considerable adhesion

(Figure 4) which was coated with thin plaster and painted

with a dark wash.

2.2 Location of the Lumber Yard.

Of paramount importance for interpretation or future

archaeological investigation is the precise location of

the site. Historic maps were drawn to so small a scale

as to make reproduction on the ground a hazardous

enterprise. The harbour foreshore, to which the yard was

oriented,

south grid

Thus there

placement.

changed over time while

was superimposed on the

was no surviving landmark

a government north-

convict settlement.

to assist in site

As a result of the 1989 excavation, the site of the

Lumber Yard can be plotted with some degree of accuracy.

(It should be noted that measurements were made over a

two metre section only, in the face of a blistering

westerly wind sweeping excavated sand across the site and

with trench collapse imminent. The readings should not

be deemed totally accurate especially if any degree of

error is exaggerated by bearings towards the north of the

site)

1 1


Figure 3. Detai I of mortar on the top of the wall. (scale in 100mm. intervals)

Figure 4 Detail of render. (scale in 100mm. intervals)

1 2


The discovery of three walls of the western annex to the

1816 barracks coupled with an archival plan of the

barracks (Figure 5) sets the site of the Lumber Yard three metres east and 2. 5 metres south of the site as

previously plotted while the whole site slews at an angle

of 2 degrees west (Figure 6)

2.3 Depth of Convict Remains and Overburden.

The depth of the convict evidence in the north-west

sector of the site having been determined during the 1987

excavation, the 1989 samp 1 es concentrated on the north

east, south-west and south-eas~ (Areas 1, 2 and 3

respectively; Figure 7).

The convict occupation level lay at 1. 5 metres from the

surface in the north-east (Area 1) and at almost two

metres from the surface in the south-west (Area 2). In

the south-east (Area 3) convict debris was 1 ocated 1 . 5

metres from the surface but the evidence comprised loose

bricks similar to and at the same level as those

encountered near the top of the surviving barracks wall.

This excavation could go no deeper without endangering

the stability of the Stationmaster's House. There is no

reason other than to suppose that convict evidence survives in this area at even greater depth from the

surface which is now the highest part of the site.

The overburden comprises three distinct levels: the

modern surface, a deep layer of fill either introduced or in the form of drift sand and the hisT..oric occupation

floors. The first is of dubious importance other than in

selected areas where it may provide social evidence

appertaining to occupation of the ext,ant, buildings. The

second cannot justify excavation by hand. In Area 2,

1 3

I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

~- - .... - -------

.... . , ·- .

" 1•

\ ... I'

" \

! . !

I I

! I -- ---·--·

i I'

i

.. ..... ·.:.. : ·: · -· . .. . -

:

..

, ·

: d'"A-cZci5 'f7"' ~h~ oz~~ .r~Lo~·ade.., .

c/Ye ?rca:..,. Z l' e, • :,~ - . h-.. .r~ /',.,.~,, • .,z _ ~i'I!"':«Z£-.. n-r. -n~.&. --":ddi£LC.,rc.r; •

.ftr c .. n.;•r~b·•r r-?.._ "''""'•· en.', r4. Cu..rz.,m·..z7,uo~e., .. ~-

r~..e.• -~:

~/J ~~ ........ ~ . . , .

.,.,, • .,1.1"' I.

-~~~};? · ' . -··--= ··--·--.-------..

!· . . • ' .

,.... ___ ,.

/' ~-

,.,...~11111 iii I~-. ~~: .. _-·:.~~---~~ .• , ... ~ --~ - ..

•

! · I

-/ / '

I

.. . -· . r ·. I.

I ~ ll .. .....

'· •. fl i

- ____ _L . . ! -·----·~.l---...1..--:...--·---~-·--L--'---...,...-

. ~

.. '. •

· ..r.-teZ,.;_ ,/ J-r~:,,;,. ,.,z. __ ,;,.;· ·i P.r...-: ""'"'';;r..:....r -,/4'-l-•.., . . .. , . ... .:.

·.,.,,

:·~'!·· · . .. : .•. ·-· ... ..

.. :· .. : .. · . •. ~ -

· ..

·-::.-.-=..:a..·

·'

.. • .. ... :.

> :{~:- ··:::~/;(; _·~:<: !.;<-.-::-·.-: ··-

. , ~ . .... . ··

. ·. : ..- .- ~ ~- -:.. ,,.. .

~ : - ~.. .. ~ .· . . · :·_!·:

~ : ~:: ·,;_~~-<~.:-~;;_ .. _ : · .-:~::'.:~·. ,: _;_ · .: ! ·- ·

I

·1.l

I

t I

·I.

- _ · p~~

. ·-

.· . ;.)

.·. ~·

~- -c,_,,.,.,e - :..o.,......., ... . . , ....

~,.,. ..... : .

' ..

' . . ,• . . Jl' .. .r; , . · .. :;--. - .

· . ..... _._. .. ·': ·

.. .

'

:: -''

,; . .. . ~

.·._ . -. . .

: .. _!'.,· .. ••· •

·.·.

:.--- ----! :·· I

-~ - - -·· ·< r:::·;~~: .:- '··: ... .:..: ~~ ~-~~ - ~ -·-·-- ·-: .. ~-·-

/

! ! -

.. '

Figure 5

PlAN OF WESTERN HALF OF LUMBER YARD DATED 1840S SHOWING AREA 2 EXCAVATION

14

I I

I I I I I

Figure 6

THE LUMBER YARD SITE.

(Courtesy of B.Collins, Eckford Johnson and Partners, Newcastle)

012 34.5 ~l£ ........

l

l) 15 ~

1 5

I I I II/

! I I IJ I ' ; I

I i /J

I li I r.-:1

I fJ1

... kj . ~ -

I M A / t • n /

1

I , ~ I . l i ;

1 •• • • i ;/;

I; I I ,~

I I . I I I " I

, . I

i· \ i

Figure 7

\ \ . .. --- .

SITE PLAN SHOWING TEN METRE GRlD AND EXCAVATED UNliS

SCALE 1:500

- ---

I

\


almost 13 tonnes of sand produced less

kilograms of artefacts much of doubtful

ability. The discovery in that Area of the

young dog (Figure 8) ritually buried beneath a

Figure 8 Unit 208 facing east. Skeieton of a young dog. (scale in 100mm. intervals)

than eight

diagnostic

grave of a

coal

scuttle within the drift sand deposit, whilst

i 1 1 umi nat i ng a minor tragedy in the 1 i ves of those who

once occupied one of the Scott Street cottages, cannot

justify time consuming excavation of an otherwise

unproductive matrix (see Appendix 3 for details).

The depth of the convict occupation level is now

determined. It is marked by a definite change in colour

and, more important for mechanical excavation, by a

marked change in texture. It is at this level only that

excavation by archaeological methods is justified other

than for the sand deposits adjacent to structural

features. These should be removed by hand for the

1 7

I I I I I

II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

protection of those features and because it was in this

locality that the only meaningful artefact deposits were

found (see Part 10.3).

2.4 Aboriginal Evidence.

Whilst Aboriginal material was located in only one small

section of the excavated area, the importance of its

presence cannot be overstated. Almost total reclamation

of Newcastle Harbour and development of the former

foreshore must mean that little evidence of Aboriginal

occupation c~uld survive. Certainly none is known as

surviving for until we reach some three kilometres

inland. Yet it survives on this site, survives in a form

indicative of a long history of occupation and thus

extends the material history of the Lumber Yard site

centuries before the arrival of the convicts.

18

I I I I I I I I I I I I

II I I I I I I il

~J

3.THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL FUTURE

3.1. Archaeological Potential

The archaeo 1 og i ca 1 potentia 1 of the Lumber Yard site is

enormous. Excavation in 1987 and 1989 embraced only

about 150 metres out of an ava i 1 ab 1 e area of some 3000

square metres. Each area investigated has yielded

convict evidence. In addition, it is known that the

former convict guardhouse and sergeant's quartersin the

west of the site were occupied by Captain Livingstone,

the harbourmaster, fro·m and after 1853. These buildings,

therefore, span the gap between convict occupation and

that 1 ater in the century represented by the two extant

buildings, the Paymaster's Office and the Stationmaster's

House. At the other end of the sea 1 e, ev ide nee of an

Abor i gina 1 camp site may extend archaeo 1 og i ca 1 evidence

by centuries.

3.2 Archaeological Constraints.

The results of the 1989 excavation have made the

constraints upon future archaeological excavation

abundantly clear.

Aboriginal evidence is protected by legislation which

must be complied with in the event of excavation in its

locality.

The overburden above the convict and aboriginal

occupation levels comprises 1.5- 2 metres of drift sand.

That no injury was sustained during the 1989 excavation

is little less than miraculous. In any future excavation

19

I I I I I I I

II I I I I

II I I I I

I I II I I

the overburden must be contained behind revetment wa 11 s

or cut back to allow for natural repose which probably

means creating a gentle slope about eight metres wide.

The latter ·would not be possible in any area where

convict or other structures were less than eight metres

apart and would not be possible in the vicinity of the

extant buildings without greatly reducing the area

available for excavation. Indeed, excavation of any sort

adjacent to the Stationmaster's House may interfere

seriously with future use and occupation of that

building.

Fragility of the structural remains imposes considerable

conservation problems. The surviving wall is built of

underfired sandstock bricks bonded with sandy mortar with

almost no adhesive qualities. The walls were originally

protected by thick lime,e render but this has mainly

gone. Un 1 ess the wa 11 s can be preserved they shou 1 d not

be exposed other than in small sections for a brief

period if necessary for the interpretation of the

building.

Equally, the compacted rubble floors and paths cannot be

i eft exposed. They are constructed of broken brick and

chert embedded in the natural river sand. Exposure must

loosen this surface.

3.3 Interpretation of the Site.

The investigation of 150 square metres out of a tota 1

recorded area of over 4600 square metres, 2% of the site,

cannot provide sufficient archaeological evidence for

valid interpretation. What we have is a bit of

archaeological evidence and a deal more historical

evidence though with gaps in it while the 1987 excavation

revea 1 ed, in the form of structures for which there was

no historical evidence, that the two were at variance.

The site could be interpreted on this information

New~~at~e Lu~ber Yard ~9&9 20


expanded perhaps by comparative data from other

contemporary convict sites, but this could be done with

any site anywhere. The Lumber Yard provides a unique

opportunity of expanding the known evidence. This

potential must be realised.

3.4 A Plan for Future Archaeological Investigation.

Total excavation of the whole of the Lumber Yard site as

a single exercise is out of the question. The

conservation problems are too great while the expense

would be prohibitive. Volunteers cannot be expected to

work. for months on end. Their places would have to be

taken by paid personnel which would add thousands of

dollars to the cost. The only viable approach is

seasonal excavation of specific areas and the former lay

out of the Lumber Yard lends itself to this concept

(Figure 9). This approach also allows for excavation in

order of priorities which are, to a large extent, self

evident.

Zone 1 is the 1 owest part of the site and that 1 east

likely to contain standing structures. It is therefore

the most difficult area to interpret both in

archaeological and public terms. It is also the area

where least reliance can be placed on the historical

record in that few structures are recorded yet structural

ev ide nee has been

area closest ~o

Integration of

revea 1 ed . In addition , this

the proposed harbourside

the two public spaces

is the

park.

reQuires

considerable more evidence of this sector of the convict

site than is presently available.

Zone 2 takes second position in order of priority because

nothing is known of the guardhouse and sergeant's

quarters other than their dimensions. Given the depth of

convict remains in both north and south of the site, the


11

Figure 9

AN ARCHAEOLOGICAL ZONING PLAN.

012 345 ~~

t) 15 J)

22


footings of the two buildings should survive at a depth

of 1- 1.5metres below the modern surface. The fact that

these buildings alone span the middle years of the

nineteenth century makes them of particular importance in

the interpretation of the historic site.

Zone 3 covers the site of the 1818 barracks. Further excavation of this building is required for the purpose

of interpretation. The 1989 excavation covered only

partof a room added to the original structl~re. The main

barracks complex is as yet uninvestigated. The extent of

this excavation wiil depend upon the feasibility of

conserving above ground any structural evidence revealed.

If above ground conservation cannot be achieved,

excavation should be limited to such sample as is required for interpretive purposes.

Zone 4 excavation depends upon decision as to the future

of the Stationmatser's House and the structural

feasibility of excavation at depth so close to its

foundations. The extent of the former convict building

available for excavation is limited. It may be that no excavation in this area is viable.

Zone 5 should, in a sense, be part of Zone 1 but 1 ies

deep within the modern embankment. Whether this zone

shou 1 d be excavated at a 11 depends upon the resu 1 ts of the Zone 1 excavation and decision as to the future of the site as a whole.

Zone 6 and 7 excavations depend upon the future of the adjoining land.

23


I I I I I I I I I

4- REMOTE SENSING AS AN AID TO

EXCAVATION

Two major techniques are available for the remote sensing

of subsurface features.

4.1 Resistivity Testing.

This operates by means of an electric current which

bounces off subsurface intrusions such as brick or stone and shou 1 d be ab 1 e to determine the presence of wa 11 s

especially in a sand matrix which is ideal for this

technique. However, it has limitations.

The main limitation is the depth of field.

probes may not penetrate with accuracy· to

required.

Resistivity

the depth

The second 1 i mi tat ion is ~hat the e 1 ectri c waves bounce

off all subsurface intrusions without discernment. If

resistivity had been used as a forerunner to the 1989

excavation, it would have discovered features in Areas 1

and 3 which comprised modern or recent fill while in Area

2 brick falls would have been located as well as the wall. It is doubtful if resistivity would have revealed the robbed walls two metres below the surface.

The 1989 excavation coupled with the 1840s archival plan

(Figure 5) means that the former Lumber Yard buildings

can be plotted with greater ac~uracy than resistivity

testing can provide. However, the possibilities of

resis~ivity sensing should not be ignored provided it can

be done without or at minimal expense. A negative

resu 1 t, however, wou 1 d not negate the site's potentia 1

for archaeological excavation.

24


4.2 Subsurface Radar.

This technique has not been used for archaeology in

Australia though it has been adopted with some success in

America. It was used by the Boston Institute in 1988 to

determine the depth below the modern surface of colonial

building debris in down town Boston as forerunner to a

million dollar archaeological investigation. It is a

technique known in Newcastle where radar has been used to

diagnose geological faults and mining activity which have

caused surface subsidence.

The advantage of subsurface radar is that it can be set

at specific depths. Hence a subsurface profile can be

obtained. The disadvantages are cost, lack of experience

in its use as an archaeological tool in Australia and the

fact that it can reveal only structural evidence. Social

and historical data in the form of artefacts or floor

deposits cannot be recovered by radar.

However, should the structural remains revealed on the

Lumber Yard site prove to delicate to permit above-ground

exposure, subsurface radar may prove an alternative, if

limited, means of interpretation.

A major limitation to any form of remote sensing is its failure to involve people. The participation of the

people of Newcastle in the recovery and interpretation of their past is seen as a major advantage of archaeological

investigation.

25

j


5- RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE

EVENT OF FUTURE EXCAVATION

Whilst the consultant archaeologist accepts

responsibility for the recommendations which follow, they

are made after discussion with the heritage planning

consultant,

contributions.

Ms Meredith Walker, who has made considerable

5.1 Site Office and Laboratory Space.

undercover laboratory iartefact sorting The provision

space which

essential.

of

should also be the central site office is

This should be equipped with water,

power for an urn, a computer, electronic balance

indoor photography and a telephone. If excavation

take place in the height of summer, a refrigerator

also be provided.

light,

and for

is to

should

Whilst this provision involves additional outlay, it

reduces overall cost.

the sorting and cataloguing(which take almost

as long as the dig) becomes central to the

excavation, and

attracts a different

notably those who feel

buckets but who are the

of the type of artefacts

produce

group

too old

very people

excavation

of volunteers,

to dig or cart

with knowledge

is likely to

this enables much of the work which otherwise

would have to be done be paid

done on a voluntary basis.

professionals to be

26

II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

The facilities

expense.

outlined can be provided without major

The site office could be located on the ground floor of

the Paymaster's Office in Bond Street. Though not ideal

in terms of space, it is adjacent to, indeed part of, the

site. Its use has the advantage that the building ceases

to appear the abandoned, semi-derelict structure, a

retreat for homeless alcoholics which it has become.

Since the building is subject to a Permanent Conservation

Order, any repairs or renovations necessary to enable its

use would be subject to the approval of the Heritage and

C'.onservation

only security

windows) and,

required.

Branch. From an archaeological

(replacement of doors and

preferably, the removal of the

viewpoint,

repair of

graffiti, is

Water could

adjacent to

come from

the office.

a hose provided with water control

The hose could be run from any

convenient outlet.

Power and light can be by way of a temporary builder's

connection.

The telephone can be portab i e.

telephone would be of greater value

while ensuring that unauthorised calls

telephone can be hired.

5.2 Training of Volunteers.

Indeed, a portable

than a fixed outlet

are not made. The

Ail volunteer excavation programmes to date have been etd

hoc and the 1987 and 1989 Lumber Yard excavations were no

exception. Such programmes result in a nucleus of people

with some understanding of the archaeological

with considerable commitment. They lead

process

also to

and

the

27


II

employment of many who turn

understanding

of the Newcastle

up for a single day and end

commitment.

must involve

with little and little

Excavation Lumber Yard

several seasons. To build into the ongoing excavation

programme a more theoretical training course would add to

the satisfaction and skills of the committed while

encouraging the as yet uncommitted to view the programme

as a professional undertaking.

It is suggested that the initial training course take the

form of a weekend seminar to be held at the University of

Newcastle,

Town Hall

technical

fram.ework

the Newcastle

or a similar

Regional Library or Museum, the

venue and cover not only the

of excavation but the theoretical aspects

of historical archaeology within the

disciplines of archaeology and anthropology

in the framework of heritage conservation.

and its place

This would

involve several specialist lecturers.

The weekend seminar would be followed by a single evening

lecture and question time held a few days before the

start of

discussion

excavation. This would

of the· issues arising out

well

the

as specific

excavation.

excavation director

gearing to the aims

The lecture could

who of necessity

allow for general

of the seminar as

and methodology of

be conducted by the

would have to be in

Newcastle to prepare the site in advance of excavation

proper.

The training course outlined could be expanded according

to demand.

5.3 Conservation Advise.

The fragility of the convict remains is now. known.

Before further excavation proceeds, advice should be

obtai ned as to temporary conservation while a conservator

28

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

II I•

with special knowledge of sandstock brick deterioration

in coastal (ozone-rich) areas should inspect the site

during the course of excavation so as to determine

permanent conservation methods and policy.

5.4 Aboriginal Relics.

Aboriginal evidence has so far been located in only one

small portion of the site at its lowest level. It was

found, however, adjacent

possibility that similar

to convict deposits. The

evidence could be revealed

e 1 sewhere must be kept in mind. A contact within the

National Parks and Wildlife Service should be sought

before excavation and, preferably, an expert on

Aboriginal sites available for contact if necessary.

5.5 Revetment walls

Since this requirement has been covered in Part 3.2 it

wi 11 not be reiterated here. However, if any part of the

site is to be left exposed, which wi il involve

substantial lowering of the present ground level,

permanent retaining walls will be necessary.

5.6 Security Fencing

This is also essential. In the 1 ast days of the 1989

excavation vandals collapsed the 1880s sump in Area 2. Luckily this was the least important feature revealed.

Cyclone wire fencing could be erected on a temporary

basis around any excavation area during the course of the

excavation. After that it could be removed, stored and

used for the next excavation. Construction should be

quick in that the overburden of sand means that the fence

posts could be belted in to a depth sufficient to ensure

Newcaat~e Lumber Vard ~989 29

I I I I I I I I I I I

! I

I I I I I

II I

!I I

that they could not be removed by hand. There is a

problem along Bond Street where there is almost no

overburden. There the number of fence posts will have to

be minimized and, perhaps, the wire braced with cross

beams.

5.7 Mechanical Excavation

The depth of the overburden is now known (for details of

excavated Units see Appendix 3). It can be removed

mechanically since it is now established that it contains

insufficient data to justify excavation by hand. In many

parts of the site, the upper strata could be removed with

a front-end loader, though as excavation proceeded a

back-hoe would have to take over. Mechanical assistance

would allow open excavation of an extensive area.

Selected areas within the curtilage of the extant

buildings could yield occupation evidence of late

nineteenth - early twentieth century date, but subject to

this the archaeologically sensitive deposits lie deep in

the ground or adjacent to surviving structural remains.

The latter can now be located with precision though the

height to which any structural feature (or any part of

it) survives is not known. Meehan i ca 1 excavation cou 1 d

penetrate deep within the confines of former structures

1 eav i ng the site of the wa 11 s for excavation by hand

other than for the removal of obviously unproductive

material.

30

II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

6. INTRODlJCTION AND

BACKGROUND RESEARCH.

6.1 Introduction.

The 1989 excavation was commissioned to provide evidence

of subsurface features on which to formulate a

Conservation Plan for the site. It was also designed to

the strategy provide information on which to formulate

for future, more extensive, excavation.

6.2 Site Setting and Description.

The Lumber Yard site lies north of Scott Street, east of

Watt Street and west of Telford Street. It embraces part

of the land occupied by the Customs House in the west,

most of Lot 4 D.P.237912, part of land occupied by the

Migrant Health Centre and the Department of Health in the

east while to the north it extends under Bond Street.

Also situated on Lot 4 D.P.237912 are two buildings which

are subject to Permanent Conservation Orders

independently of the Lumber Yard. The Stationmaster's

House stands in the south-east corner of the block, the

Paymaster's Office in the north-west corner. Both

impinge on the Lumber Yard site.

The site slopes from 3.5 metres above datum in the north

west to over seven metres in the south-east. Extending

east to west just north of the centre of the site is a

low concrete retaining wall. South of this the land has

been fi II ed. The fill

form a steep embankment.

site had also been filled

hfls eroded north of the wall to

The north-east sector of the

in recent years. Much of the

surface has been covered with gravel compacted by years

of use as a car park.

31

I I I I I I I

II II I I I I I I I I I I I I

The site is oriented to the original shoreline which was

just north of Bond Street and located close to

Newcastle's first wharf which lat at the end of Watt

Street. It is known that the northern section of the

site was low-lying but the original slope to Scott Street

was unknown at the start of excavation. It was also

known that the area was originally sand dune and that

East Newcastle was notorious in the late nineteenth

century for sand storms. The effect this might have had

on the site was not known.

6.3 Historical Background.

The history of the site is being compiled by Dr. John W.

TlJrner independently of the excavation brief. Since it

will be incorporated into the Conservation study, it is

not proposed to pre-empt it here. However, a few brief

points must be made if this report is to be intelligible.

1801 First settlement of Newcastle, aborted due to

1804

difficulty of maintaining supplies. Not known

whether the Lumber Yard was then occupied.

Second sett 1 ement of Newcast 1 e.

built at the end of Watt Street.

A wharf was

Early maps

show that the west side of the Lumber Yard site

was used for stockpiling coal.

1818 Erection of barracks in south-west corner of

site.

1818 Evidence given tc the Bigge Commission that the

Lumber Yard had been forma 1 i sed. It was

described as measuring 330 by 150 feet ( 100 x

45m. ) surrounded by a 1 og fence 1 1 feet (3m. )

high.

32

1820 Construction of a second barracks, allegedly of

timber, in the south-east corner of the site.

Later known to be of brick.

1827 Barracks capable of housing over 100 convicts

built.

1832

c. 1832

1846

Construction quarters.

of guardhouse

East extension of 1818 barracks.

and

Completion of southern breakwater.

subsequently withdrawn from Newcastle.

sergeant's

Convicts

1850 Lease of the 'prison' to Tully and Mi tche 11 .

1818 barracks used as a ships' chand 1 ery and

Post Office.

1851 1818 barracks reported as having burnt down.

1853 Guardhouse and sergeant's quarters converted into an office and quarters for the

harbourmaster, Captain Alexander Livingstone.

1857 Railways Department acquisition.

1864 The old 'hospital' in the south-east corner of

the site, then used for storing life boats,

reported as having collapsed due to build-up of sand against the walls.

1 u 711.,. 1 ,_, r '-'•.:> Erection of coal company offices along Scott

Street on leasehold title.

1879 Single storied house built for the berthing

master on Bond Street.

Office.

Now the Paymaster's

33

I I I

II I I I I I I

, I

I I I I I I I I I I

1870s-92 Construction of sailmaker's loft, later E. & W. Brett, west of the Paymaster's Office.

1885 Two storied house built for the traffic

controller on Scott

Stationmaster's House.

Street. Now the

1895 Construction by Railways of house on site

of Livingstone's office (demolished 1915).

1901-4 Construction of ra i 1 ways house between Brett's

and Paymaster's Office (demolished 1921).

Historic maps vary as to the shape, size and location of

the convict structures. However, the record of the

timber stockade, the report of the prison burning down and of the 'hospital' being flattened coupled with a late

1870s photograph of derelict timber buildings behind the

co 11 aps i ng timber stockade 1 ed to the assumption, he 1 d

unt i 1 the 1 989 excavation, that the convict structures

were ali built of timber.

6.4 Previous Archaeological Investigation.

In July ,1987, a brief excavation was undertaken in the

north-west sector of the site to ascertain whether

convict structures justify the site

survived of such significance as to being withheld from auction. The

excavation, which took only four days, was conducted by a single archaeologist with the assistance of a swelling

number of volunteers as the spectacular results became known through the media. The site was withheld from

auction and a Permanent Conservation O~de~ (N0.570)

placed on it. In this the Heritage Counci 1 was acting

more in faith than in expectation as only a very small

section of the site had been investigated.

The excavation established that introduced black sand


II

I I I I

-- --- --- ------------------------------

with modern intrusions extended towards the north-east.

To the south the sand had a greater component of loam due

to spillage over the east-west retaining wall.

6.5 Archaeological Strategy.

The 1987 excavation had provided some information about

the north-west sector of the site. The rest of the site

was unknown. The 1989 excavation sought to test the site

across time, so as to embrace any change in

building techniques and therefore in the nature of

possible structural remains,

across space, so as to sample the unknown part

of the site,

and to sample the sensitivity of the overburden

appertaining to 1 ate nineteenth early twentieth century

occupation.

Three sample excavation areas, numbered 1, 2 and 3

respectively, were selected for sampling on the basis of

historic maps known at the start of excavation (see Figure 7).

Area 1 lay in the north-east sector of the site and

covered the assumed line of

convict structure dating to an elongated north-south

the middle of the convict period which may 1 ater have been used as a sa i 1 maker's loft.

Area 2 lay in the south west of the site and covered the

assumed 1 i ne of the first known convict structure which may or may not have been rebuilt as the barracks of 1826.

Area 3 lay in the south-east sector across the assumed 1 i ne of the convict building later known as t.he 'hospital' and within the curtilage occupied in conjunction with the Stationmaster's House.

35


7_ PERSONNEL AND PUBLICITY

7.1 Volunteer Programme.

A nucleus of experienced volunteers has been established

in Newcastle as a result of several excavations conducted

over the last decade. The response to the call for

volunteer excavators in 1987 suggested that there would

be little difficulty in obtaining inexperienced labour.

Indeed, over 80 people gave of their time during the 1989

excavation and between them did almost all of the

scraping, shovelling and bucketting necessary in

archaeological excavation.

Figure 10 Volunteers excavating Area 3, 25 June, 1989

36


} .

~~- . ~~~ ' .

~ : ..

\\ ,.

Figure 11 Volunteers excavating Area 'l, 9 juiy 1989.

7.2 The Professional Team.

l

The distance between the sample areas and the use of

inexperienced volunteers necessitated the presence of at

l east one experienced archaeologist to supervise each

Area.

The archaeological director, Dr. Damaris Bairstow,

supervised Area 2 mainly because it was nearest the site

office. Si obhan Lave 11 e took command of Area 3 which required detailed attention due to potential social

evidence

Legzdins

in its upper

was relegated

archaeological units.

to Area where the

unproductive overburden required strong men .

Peter

known

37


7.3 Media Liaison.

A pre-excavation press release by Newcastle City Council

resulted in an immediate interview by the Newcastle

Hera 1 d with the archaeo 1 og i ca 1 director. However, as in

1987, it was Margaret Henry of the Department of

Community Programmes, Newcastle University, who ensured

media exposure not just locally but State-wide. As the

more spectacular discoveries were made, media coverage

became self-generating.

Television coverage included several reports on NBN News

and guest appearances by Dr. John Turner and the

Excavation Director on NBN Newsweek, by Professor A 1 an

Ward, Professor of Hi story, Newcast 1 e University and by

the Excavation Director on the NBN morning programme.

Coverage was also given State-wide by Channel 7 News and

Nation-wide by ABC Channel 2.

A video film of the final stage of the excavation coupled

with an interview with the Excavation Director was made

by Hunter Heritage.

Radio new coverage and interviews were broadcast State

wide by the ABC while news and interviews were also

broadcast locally by the ABC, commercial and FM stations.

Press coverage was provided by the Newcastle Herald, the

Newcast 7e Star, the Newca.st 7e and Lake Macquarie Post,

the Sydney Morning Hera 7 d and the Da i 7 y Mirror. Copies

of press reports are to be found in Appendix 1.

7.4 Site Tours.

Controversy surrounding the recent 1 y announced p 1 ans for

the harbourside park immediately north of the Lumber Yard

38

· - -


site had generated considerable local interest. To

satisfy this while freeing the excavation team from

unregulated visitors , site tours were conducted on the

second and third Sundays of the excavation at 10. Oam. ,

12. 0 noon, 2.0pm. and 3.30pm. Dr John Turner guided

those attending on Sunday, 2nd July, while Meredith

Walker, Heritage Planning Consultant who had

responsibi 1 ity for the Conservation Plan took the tours

on 9th July. By that time an artefact processing

laboratory had been established in the Seamen's pick-up

shed adjacent to the site. This was inc 1 uded in the

tour.

The tours were highly successful. Well over a thousand

visitors attended and it is estimated that almost 300

people turned up for a single tour on Sunday, 9th July.

Figure 12 Dr. John Turner at start of site tour, Area 1, 2 July, 1989.

39

I I I

f l

I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Figure 13 Meredith Walker with 2pm. tour Area 2, 9 July, 1989.

40

I I I I I I I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I

8- METHODOLOGY

8.1 Field Methodology.

The site of the Lumber Yard as known from historic maps

had been plotted on to a modern town plan by Ron Bown of

Suters Busteed & Associates, architects and town

planners, and made available in 1987. This plan formed

the basis of the archaeological strategy.

All historic maps known at the commencement of excavation

were reproduced on f i 1m to a sing 1 e sea 1 e and

superimposed on the modern plan. The result showed

considerable variance in the location of former

structures due partly to the scale at which the original

maps had been produced, partly because some historic maps

were but sketch plans and partly because some buildings

had changed over time.

Since the precise location of any historic feature could

not be determined, the whole of the land available for

excavation was gridded by the Newcastle City Council

surveyor into a ten metre grid marked out by star posts.

The areas chosen for excavation

were broad enough to cover a 1 1 possible

locations of the structural feature sought were plotted by reference to the grid so than

any features revealed could be surveyed into an overal 1 plan of the site.

Each excavation Area was subdivided into one-metre

quadrats to enable accurate p 1 ott i ng of any structura 1 (or other)

features revealed

41

I I I I I I I

!I I il

I I I I I I I I I I I

determination

artefacts if required

of spatial distribution

control of inexperienced volunteers.

of

Each quadrat was differentiated by an alphabetical prefix

north to south and a nume rica 1 sequence east to west

according to the ten-metre grid.

Excavation was in traditional stratigraphic units

numbered consecutive 1 y in order of discovery but given

the prefix 1, 2 or 3 according to the excavation Area.

Since facilities for weighing the excavated material

could not be provided, weight (other than in Area 1) was

estimated on the basis of bucket count, a full but level

bucket containing ten kilograms. This coupled with the

experience of the supervising team and of the more

experienced volunteers in estimating weight provided a

reasonable, if not fully accurate, assessment of total

weight against which to compare artefact yield. Due to

the extent of the overburden in Area 1, no bucket count

was taken. If a statistical comparison proved important,

it cou 1 d be achieved on the basis of cubic metres as

recorded in section.

All artefacts recovered were placed in trays labelled

according to the stratigraphic unit and quadrat from

which they came.

8.2 Laboratory Methods.

All artefacts taken from the field were washed at the end of each day and left to dry overnight.

Artefacts from each Unit or, if area was diagnostic, each

Unit by Quadrat, were sorted into material and function

according to predetermined categories (see Appendix

Artefact Analysis Database), only groups of identical

ar'tefacts being bagged together. Each artefact bag was

42

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

numbered consecutively according to provenance while the

contents of each bag were counted and weighed, the

weights being recorded

The bag number, contents,

to the nearest tenth of a gramme.

weight and number were noted on

Artefact

data.

Scientific

Historical

Inventory sheets to facilitate entry as computer

The database used was a variation of the Minark

Database System as developed at the Centre for

Archaeology, University of Sydney.

The artefact bags were grouped according to provenance,

placed into larger bags for ease of handling and boxed in

archive boxes. The box number was entered on the

Inventory sheet and thence on to the computer database so that the location of any artefact can be retrieved.

Whilst their number and weight was included in the data

sheets for statistical purposes, whole or reusable bricks

were boxed separately for ease

in the event of restoration.

of storage and retrieval

Coins were kept apart for

security purposes.

All artefacts of European origin have been deposited at

the Newcastle Regional Museum. Artefacts of Aboriginal

origin have been deposited with the National Parks and

Wildlife Service, Northern Division, at Raymond Terrace.


9. THE EXCAVATION

In each of the excavated Areas a deep deposit of sand was

located below the modern stratigraphic units. This had

not been foreseen. As the depth of the sand became

established, the archaeological principle of straight

sided trenches had to be abandoned in favour of safety.

Even so, natural repose could not be achieved. The

result was constant collapse, especially after the sand

began to dry, a process which was exacerbated by several

days of westerly winds. The dangerous fill units

encountered in Area 2 necessitated deliberate collapse.

9.1 Convict Brick Paving.

Though not part of the sample excavation, mention should

be made of the accidental discovery of convict brick

paving in the Bond Street footpath firstly because it

established that convict evidence survives in the north

east sector of the site apart from that located in the

Area 1 trench and secondly because it provided a level

against which to check the Area 1 excavation.

The brickwork (Figure 14) was revealed and partly

disturbed by a front-end loader in the course of site

clearance but the section revealed was mainly uncovered

by hand. It lies over 1.5 metres below the embankment

but level with the curb on the south side of Bond Street.

For security, the bank was collapsed over the paving

after photographic recording.

44

I I I I

I I


Figure 14 Convict brickwork in Bond Street facing south. (scales in 100mm. intervals)

9.2 Area 1.

The aim of this excavation was to cut across the line of

an elongated north-south building the originalfunction of

which is not known but which was used as storage sheds in

the 1840s and 1850s (Figure 5). The building may or may

not be identical with the sailmaker's loft, a similar

structure known from the late nineteenth and early

twentieth century (Figure 15).

That the Area was covered with modern fi 11 comprising

black sand bedded down with a thin layer of topsoil

(Units 101 & 107) was known from 1987. This was removed mechan i ca i i y in the eastern end of the excavated area

(Figure 16). Mechanical assistance was .:'lbandoned in the

west end due to the unexpected presence of demo 1 it ion

rubble close to the surface (Units 102, 103 & 108; Figure

17). A seven by two metre trench was laid out.

45

I I I I

I I I I I I I I

Figure 15 Newcastle 1906. The sailmaker's loft is shown in the foreground. Note the complexity of structures on the site at this time

46

I I I I I I I I

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Figure 16 Mechanical clearance of overburden in

.;; j -"-~ ---··· .. - .

·-... ..... -...... I

Figure 17 Area 1 facing west. Unit 102 is defined in the western end.

Newcaat~e LuMber Yard ~989 47


I I

I I I I I

The rubble proved to be even more recent fill, the black

sand continuing underneath (Figure

.... ·~~. ·

· · ~

18)

;~(~~~·~ \ _

-~~~~~ -~· .... ,~~~_;. , . .-·---~~~\".~

~-

Figure 18 Area 1, Quadrats CD6-7 facing south. Concrete blocks in Unit 103. (scales in 250mm. intervals)

The dark. surface material gave way to sand ranging from

grey-brown in the east end to grey in the north and light

brown in the west (Units 104, 105 & 108; Figure 19) The

absence of amber g 1 ass and the presence of Codd bott 1 e

glass indicated that this material was not modern but the

quantity of industrial iron and coal suggested that these

units comprised imported fill.

Beneath the sandy f i 11 1 ay a sha 11 ow deposit of ye 11 ow

sand (Unit 106) similar to the wind-blown sand located in

the south sector of the site but darker and far richer in

artefacts especially brick and iron. This deposit is

considered to be eroded drift sand mixed partly with

48


Figure 19 Unit 101 over 104 over 105. (scales in 250mm. intervals)

artefacts from the fill units above but containing also

demolition debris from the former building. This gave

way to dark brown sand containing brick and iron

fragments and charcoal (Units 109 & 110). Immediately

beneath this thin stratigraphic unit lay structural

features.

A small area of brick rubble and river stones (Unit 111)

at approximately the same levei as the brickwork in Bond

Street (theodolite reading indicated less than 100mm.

below) bore all the hallmarks of the iess formed sections

of convict paving located in 1987. At the western end of

the trench was a deposit of

small river pebbles (Unit

compacted c 1 ay

11 2) considered

containing

by the

49


excavation team to be commensurate with an earth floor.

Unfortunately the exposed portion of the feature was too

small to permit final interpretation.

In the eastern end of the trench at the same ievei was a

deposit of Aboriginal material. This, together with all

chert and stone whether Aboriginal or not aii sheii and

bone was removed from less than one square metre to

permit expert examination. Preliminary examination led

to the conclusion, based on the density of the material,

that it represented a camp site of continued use over a

considerable period, possibly even for centuries. The

evidence has been deposited with the National Parks and

Wildlife Service which has been asked to re-examine it

and advise both as to the nature of the material and the

constraints upon further excavation in this location.

The Awabaka 1 Land Rights group is a 1 so cogni sant of the

evidence having sent representatives to inspect it.

One square metre bereft of surface features at this level

was further excavated (Quadrat C4, Unit 114) but, apart

from suggesting a possible continuation of the convict

floor, yielded no additional evidence.

The excavation failed in its originai aim due to the now

established deviation of the Lumber Yard site from that

calculated from the historic evidence. However, coupled

with the paving in Bond Street, it established that convict evidence survived in this section of the site.

Of equai importance is the discovery of Aboriginal

evidence preceding European settlement.

A plan, section of the north trench wall and final

photographs were taken (Figures 20, 21 & 22).

50


Figure 20 Area 1 at end of excavationfacing west. (scales in 250mm. intervals)

•

51


0

AREA 1 PLAN OF EXCAVATION

52

Figun~ 22

I AREA 1 SOUTH SECTION

I I I I I I

r;;:--..___

I ..

I . . . . .. . . ··. ·.·. · .. .

I I I I I

0

I ,....,,

I I I I I


9.3 Area 2.

The aim of this excavation was to bisect the east wall of

a rectangular building recorded in a sketch of Sophia

Campbell (Figure 23) and seemingly the first building of

consequence to be erected on the site. The considerable

-, -~ ·J_.· , - - -- ...,&..· =- ~ ...c:: -!.:.: . .... -·_-_._. __ <""_,.......:-...:..:..:.: ~ - ---

• ( · : .. _ -.

Figure 23 Lumber Yard c.1820. Detail from a sketch of Sophia Campbell

.-.: .

'

54


I I I I

variation in the size and shape of this structure as

recorded dictated a trench ten by two metres. As it

transpired, the building and hence the whole of the

Lumber Yard site proved to be some three metres west and

2.5 metres south of the alignment plotted from historic

evidence. This was determined only as a result of

extensions east, west and north of the original

excavation area.

Excavation of Area 2 was particularly hazardous. The

base of the main convict wall discovered in the course of

excavation lay almost three metres below the surface.

Above this was up to 1.5 metres of unsupported sand while

on top, in the northern side of the trench, were units of

modern fill containing brick, concrete and sandstone

which had to be co 11 apsed de 1 i berate 1 y to protect those

working below (Figure 24). The shallowness of the modern

fill on the south side of the trench proved equally

treacherous. This section, being exposed to the

Co 11 apse of some sort northerly sun, dried out fast. became a daily event (Figure 25 ).

To provide accuracy, the sectional drawings appended were

made as the excavation proceeded. In the lowest

stratigraphic units, however, they show deposits found

on 1 y towards the middle of the trench and, for the base of the wall located on its west side, evidence only from

the centre. At this stage excavation was so dangerous that only one man was permitted in the trench, the others standing by to effect rescue.

Simi 1 ar hazards were encountered in both east and west

extensions. The stratigraphic units above the convict

evidence had been fully sampled. In the extensions they

varied on 1 y mini rna 11 y. According 1 y they were removed

55


Figure 24 Volunteers working in Area 2.

' - ·"(·--·~ -·· ·· ·· -~

Figure 25 Collapse near the sump, Quadrat D5.

56


without statistical sampling and with minimal artefact recovery tunstratified' in the Artefact Inventory).

The aim was to seek only structural evidence which would

determine the exact site of the Lumber Yard and of its

component parts. No sectional drawings were made of the

extended areas but the structural evidence revealed was

incorporated into the Area Plan.

This part of the site has been used for many years for

parking cars. Compacted gravel, impenetrable by hand,

cove red the surf ace. It was removed me chanica 11 y, but

since the depth of the modern surface was unknown

mechanical assistance was limited to scraping the surface

(Figure 26)

Figure 26 Scraping back Area 2.

The same constraint meant that excavation of the surface

deposits was slow and pains~aking (Figure 27).

57

I I I I I

II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Figure 27 Volunteers excavating Area 2, 24 June 1989.

Below the surface lay a series of modern fi 11 deposits

(Units 202-206, 209-211, & 213-4) below which was yellow

drift sand. The only stratigraphic unit of interest was

Unit 208, compacted b 1 ack sand f i 11 sunk into the sand

before the introduction of modern fill which proved to be

the grave of a young dog which had been rituai ly buried

beneath a coal scuttle (Figures 28 and 29). This part of

the excavation area coincides with the back yard of a

sma 11 cottage which stood on . the Scott Street frontage.

In this deposit lies evidence of a household tragedy

early this century, the death of a loved pet which,

though st i 11 young, had so endeared hi mse 1 f as to give

rise to ceremonial mourning.

The drift sand was divided into two units (Units 207 and

212) because of the presence of bottle glass of clear

nineteenth century date below almost sterile sand east of

the upper courses of a brick wall of convict construction

58


I I I

I I

Figure 28 Unit 208 facing north. Coal scuttle. (scale in 100 mm. intervals)

Figure 29 Unit 208 facing east. Detail of dog's skeleton. (scaie in 100mm. intervals)

59

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

!I I I

(Unit 226). Thereafter the sand found level with the

wall was deemed to be Unit 212. The division was

justified since the Unit contained convict brick and

burnt timber possibly associated with the 1851 fire not

present in the upper level of sand.

The wall (Figures 32 and 33)was thought

sought, namely the east wall of the original

building which had later been extended east.

to be that

rectangular Accordingly

the trench was extended east to pick up the annex wa 11 .

It was not in this location but the extension led to the

discovery of a dry brick sump fitted with salt-glazed

stoneware pipes which led towards the Stationmaster's

House. That the two were associ a ted and probab 1 y bu i 1 t

at the same time was evidenced by the presence of

Gulliver bricks both in the sump and in construction

deposits adjacent to the house. Gu 11 i ver was a 1 oca 1

brickmaker in the 1880s. Though possibly intended for

sullage, the sump was more likely intended for storm

water d i spersa 1 . The photographic record is reproduced

here in detail (Figures 32-34) since the sump was

collapsed by vandals on the night of 9th Juiy.

Failure to locate the annex wall in the east ied to

extension west. The overburden was removed by shove 1 .

Meanwhile excavation around the main wall continued.

At a depth of 900mm. from the top of the wa 1 i on both sides t.he matrix changed. On the east side the sand

became dark and compacted because of the inc 1 us ion of

charcoal and mortar. Burnt wood and industrial iron was also found in the deposit (Unit 215; Figure 35). As adu 1 terat ion by the pa 1 e sand overburden 1 essened, the

matrix became dark~r and more compacted (Unit 217; Figure

38). Large pieces of charcoal and small iron fragments,

60

:-------------- - - - -- --


Figure 30 Area 2 Quadrats DE10 Top of wall facing north 1/7/89. (scales in 250 & 100mm. intervals)

Figure 31 Area 2 (juadrats OE1 facing west. Barracks wall (scale in 250mm. intervals)

61


Figure 32 Area 2 Quadrats 05 & 16 facing north.

Figure 33.

Sump & drain soon after discovery 2/7/89 Iron tie rods & pipe in situ. (scales in 250 & 100mm. intervals)

Area 2 Quadrat 05. Sump after removai of pipe facing west. (seale in 250mm. intervals)

62

I

I I I I I I

I I I I I

II I

I I I I I

Figure 34 Area 2 Quadrat 05. Sump facing north. (seale i n 250mm. intervals)

Figure 35 Unit 215 Quadrat DEi. Hoop iron in situ. Unit 217 outside the barrel (scaies in 100mm. intervais)

63


apparently the heads of nails, were encountered. Evidence

of these Units, clearly the product of the 1851 fire,

remained after removal in the form of a blackened section

of wa 11 . Though the stratigraphic Unit extended further

east, immediately below adjacent to the wall was a stone

flagged eaves drop (Figure 36).

Figure 39. Area 2 Quad rats DE 1 facing west. Barracks wall & eaves drop. Remains of Units 215 & 217 show as a blackened section of wall. (scale in 250mm. intervals)

East of the eaves drop the compacted sand became almost

black due to the presence of coal (Unit 219). This

appeared to represent an occupation deposit associ a ted

with post-convict use of the bui iding as beneath it lay

ochre sand compacted with grey clay and small pebble

aggregate and containing brick fragments (Unit 221).

This was the convict yard and was left unexcavated.

64

fl ---

II I

II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

Evidence of the 1851 fire

level on the west

changed colour from

became compacted.

located (Unit 218;

Figure 37. Unit 218 Quadrat E10 facing south. Burnt timber. (scales in 100mm. intervals)

of the

yellow

Large

Figure

was encountered at the same

wall. Again the material

to brown while the texture

pieces of burnt timber were

37) while evidence that the

room had been used for storage was found in the form of

hoop iron inside which was unidentified burnt materia 1.

The heat must have been intense. Large 1 umps of fused

material containing brick, iron and tar spread well

beyond the wall (Unit 222; Figures :38 and 39). Samples

of the material were retained (see Artefact Inventory).

Again the fire 1 eft a b 1 ack.ened sect. ion of wa 1 1 :

65


Figure 38 Unit 222 Quadrat E10 & blackened section of wall facing east. ( scai e i n 1 OOmm. intervals)

Figure 39 Unit 222 Quadrat DiO facing south-east. Fire damage. (scale in 250mm. intervals)

66


narrower than its counterpart on the east face and

seemingly commensurate with the burning and collapse of a

timber floor below walls protected from direct damage by

a plaster surface now mainly gone (Figure 40).

Figure 40. Quadrats DE10 facing east. Base of wall showing blackened section (scale in 250mm. intervals)

; .... ' ' ~,)f ~ ¥

''\ •" ~,.,# • - • ~

~-' 1 --

Meanwhile those excavating in the western extension to

the trench had encountered two 1 arge sections of curbstone dumped on the site presumably late last century

since they lay well within the drift sand. They could

not be removed by hand or even with a block and tackle

without causing further collapse. Hence they were

removed from the presumed site of the second wall but

left in the trench precluding further excavation in

67


Quadrats DE 6, 7 and 8. This meant that the findings in

the western extension cou 1 d not be re 1 a ted direct 1 y to

those towards the east. None the 1 ess it is more than

coincidental that evidence of fire was discovered in the

west at the same depth as that near the rna in barracks

wall.

Again the evidence was first encountered in the form of

darkened sand containing charcoa 1 and other burnt

material (Unit 220). Large pieces of burnt timber had

survived. This evidence 1 ay adjacent to the remains of

the western wa 11 which extension of the excavation area

had sought. The wall survives only in the form of

footings.

but the

suggests

The upper section may have fallen to the west

rigidity of the mortar and shell-lime render

that the wa 11 has been robbed (Figure 41 ) • The

footings could extend 750mm. below the section revealed

if the wa 11 was bui 1 t in the same way as that of the

western annex.

Figure 41 Area 2 <~uadrats DEB facing west. Robbed wail. (scale in 100mm. intervals)

68


Danger of collapse had reduced excavation against the

west face of the main wall to the centre of the trench.

Despite danger, excavation proceeded until the base of

the wall was found. It was located 750mm. below floor

level (Figure 40). There were no footings in the form of

the usual broadening from, in this case, the 1 1/2 bricks

of the walt above to two or more bricks. Stability had

relied on depth rather than breadth, though the presence

of large nodules of clay in the stratigraphic deposit

adjacent to this section of the wall may indicate a

reason to consider the sand stable at this level.

Alternately it may have been introduced to provide

additional stability. Of necessity, excavation had to be

fast, too fast and in too limited an area to determine

the presence, let alone the extent, of any foundation

trench.

By this time collapse in the central section of the

excavated area had revealed more of the annex wall than

had been excavated. In the south section of the wall

infill of bricks evidenced a blocked window (Figure 42).

In the course of the excavation season, Dr. John Turner

had unearthed an archival plan of the building in its

later stage. This showed a window in the east annexwall.

Working from this plan, Meredith Wai ker assessed that the

northern return of the located walls should lie within

centimetres of the excavated area, indeed would have ben

revealed if the trench walls could have been vertical.

Although the official time limit for the excavation had

expired the day before, those volunteers who continued on

site to assist in recording, Alan and Myrl Skinner, Ron

Gallagher, Richard Oken and Dennis Williams, at risk of

limb if not life, proceeded to undermine the northern

face of the trench. Collapse was inevitable, but

69


- -~

Figure 42. Area 2 Quadrat 010 facing east. Detail of blocked window.

their efforts were rewarded. The northern return was

found both in the east and in the west extension (Figures

43 and 44). If this wall collapsed, it too feil outside

the excavated area The 1 ike 1 i hood is that it was

robbed (Figure 45) but why, when the adjacent wa 11 was

left standing, is a mystery.

Though witnessed by few, this discovery climaxed an

excavation which had a 1 ready exceeded expectations. The

return wall coupled with the archival plan makes certain

the precise iocation of the LtJmber Yard and of al 1

structural features within it.

70


II I

Figure 43 Area 2 Quadrat 013 facing north.

~ ··

West end of north return wall. (scales in 100mm. intervals)

,·

Figure 44. Area 2 G~uadrat D10 facing north. East end of northern return. (scales in 100mm. sections)

7 1


Figure 45. Area 2 Quadrat 010 facing east. North end of annex wall showing robbed return. (seal es in 250 & 1 OOmm. intervals)

The structura 1 Units were added to the 1 i st of

stratigraphic units. Sectional drawings of Quadrats OE1-

4 and 6-10 were completed and a plan of the whole of the

excavated area was made (Figures 46, 47 and 48)

72


C•"~A~~~~ GLAe~ S~~~

DAA....C. eAN':P ..a. "'"~a.

JL. Po!e.P.>Le-5

PeC!.t'i!.L.G6

:PAt:t..C 'SA...,<X> 2.. M•IL..,.-AQ... .&.. C.o!AQ.Ge>'"'L..

:PAQ.o' 6AN"ll g_ St:l.tC.K 2... IQO N

e._,.c...:. 5-""':J) g_ c., ........

8oJQ.N"T" ":l>&IOt:l.l$

G<1.6.'"1" ._,......,:t> .R.. C.'-"--<'

0

Figure 46

AREA NORTH

2 SECTION

..., .

Figure 47

I AREA 2 SOUTH SECTION

I I I I I

· · -· .!: ·=··· · . ·. · :· · ~ ···- ......... ~ .· ... .

I I I

····- ...... ·:; / l

7/~0>····· / //; ...... . //·········

~(: :1 //J;·I··

I I I I 0 c:==:==::. ___ 1'1 .

I C. n_d. V'" OS.,......, ":D Q_ C I...A -f

J.,. "'-"' ... ...._...,,..-T"~'"P oiCt.. c.•'-'- "*" :S C::s>

I I I I

74

I I I


AREA 2 PLAN OF EXCAVATION

\-{I

0 lt

It r ( ~

"' 0 Ill lo

""'

'r

~ ft 0

7.

~

~ \j

Figure

\-t ~

\-t ~ "Z 0 ~ a. J .(

c!

' < 0 \-

'tl

'" ~ 0 0 't • "' r II cO

I "~

~

IIi

...........

0 75

I I

r l I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

9.4 Area 3.

Excavation of Area 3 was inhibited by the fact that it

was adjacent to the Stationmaster's House. The

excavation area had been selected partly for this reason,

one of the aims of the sample being to ascertain the

depth and sensitivity of the overburden adjacent to the

standing structures. The main aim was to ascertain

· whether evidence of the convict structure which occupied

this corner of the site had survived. To achieve this,

the excavation area had to cross all presumed locations

of at least one wall. Since most of that building lay

under extant buildings, freedom of choice was limited.

It had been intended to set out the Area 3 trench north

to south which would remove it from the immediate

proximity of the house. The presence of a brick and

concrete septic tank meant that the trench had to be

relocated east to west. Thus the south-west corner of

the excavation area almost touched the foundations. This

precluded excavation at depth in that sector.

The possible sensitivity of the overburden dictated

Area 3 be excavated entirely by hand. A trench

two metres was laid out and deturfed (Unit 301 ).

that

six by

The

topsoil (Unit 302) yielded evidence of the former garden

and occupation debris dating from the between war years

(Figure 49).

The topsoil gave way to sandy grey loam (Unit 303) which

also yielded occupation evidence (Figure 50). The

diagnostic ability of this evidence as well as its

distribution patterning (if any) depended upon artefact

analysis. Lying within this stratigraphic unit was a

1550 by 470mm. lens of rock-iime mortar, so large as to

be ascribed its own Unit number (Unit 304). This was

believed to be associated with the construction of the

76


.. ·-~

Figure 49

.-.;;::,_, •. ' -~~-:._ ,;...,. ..

• •. -!" ···-:·

. (·... ..... ... .· ·.: .. ;::-;. . :··. ~ ... ·-. - __ :::~;; ·. -~.i..c--f<$ ·, .>· ~ -::--~,.....: ·-~----- •.

Unit 302 Quadrats A3-4 in section facing south. Unit 303 below. (scales in 250 & 100mm. intervals)

Figure 50 Unit 303 Quadrat A6 facing south. Artefacts in situ. (scales in 100mm. intervals)

77

I I


house but mortar samples from the house were not

available for comparison.

Be 1 ow this Unit 1 ay sand. Yellow drift. sand (Unit 305)

covered most of the excavated area but it was discoloured

in the north-east corner (Unit 306) where pressed brick

was found a metre below the surface (F i gure 51j. The

Figure 51. Unit 306 Quadrat 86 facing north east. Pressed brick in situ. (seal es in 250 & 1 OOmm. intervals)

sand in the north-east sector is therefore a disturbed

deposit, presumabiy the result of construction of the

septic tank about a metre north-east from the excavated

area.

78


At this depth excavation in the western end of the trench

ceased lest collapse undermine the foundations of the

house. Work continued in the east end where the

disturbed sand yielded to undisturbed yellow sand. A

metre and a half below the surface a scatter of convict

bricks was found (Figure 52). Theodolite readings

established that the bricks lay at the same depth as the

top of the east wall in Area 2 where a brick scatter was

the first indication of structural remains.

Figure 52 Unit 305 Quadrat AB5 facing south. Convict brick scatter (scales at 250 & 100mm. intervals)

That structural evidence from the convict period probable

survives in this sector of the site also had been

established. Excavation ceased in the face of imminent

collapse (Figure 53) A sectional drawing was made of the

north face of the trench and the convict evidence

superimposed on it (Figure 54).

79


, .. , -·- .. ~ .. ,..;..·

.. -,

.,.l~ ··,~·

i .

Figure 53 Area 3 facing east. Overhang above convict evidence. (scale in 250mm. intervals)

80


.. ~ .. . .. .... , ..

• .. • 0

Figure 54

AREA 3 NORTH SECTION

DEPTH OF CONVICT BRICKS SUPERIMPOSED

.. .... ..... ... .. ··

.. .. ; . .

-~. . ::·:6. > : ·. : . : : : .. ......

... . -. , . 0 .. '" I

0 : •• •

. . . , • 0 ' . . ' . . . . . . . . , ; .......

· .. .... , . .... . • 0 ..... .. ~ ·.. ; • .' , • - 0

0 M.

81


I I

I I I

9.5 Backfilling.

Before backfilling exposed structural features were

covered with a thin layer of clean sand. The base of

each trench was covered with shade cloth and shade cloth

was stapled to the sides so as to distinguish the

disturbed excavated areas from those undisturbed in the

event of future excavation.

Newcastle City Council provided a back-hoe. Regrettably,

the operator

because of

announced

reach, a

that he could not use the back-hoe

problem which, where applicable,

could have been overcome. Backfi IIi ng

collapsed

with

also

the front

part of

end

the collapsed the sahde cloth,

trench walls and caused

in Area 2 who hectically

wall by hand shovelling

towards the sen of the

use the back end. By

been done.

considerable work for volunteers

fill

this

tried to protect the exposed

(Figures 55 and 56). Only

was the operator prepared to

time most of the damage had

.. .... ·- ~-

Figure 55 Backfilling with the front end 13/7/1989. Note collapse on left above the wall

82


Figure 56 Volunteers trying to protect barracks wai I from the back-hoe

Area 3 was only partially backfilled mechanically. The

sand had been removed ciose to the house to such a depth

that it cou 1 d not be 1 eft 1 oose 1 y packed. Workmen from

Newcastle City Council completed the backfill by hand,

ramming the fill down.

83

I I I I I

, I


10- ANALYSES AND INTERPRETATIONS

Statistical analysis is claimed to produce meaningful

patterns of distribution across time and space.

Quantification, therefore, shou 1 d give rise to objective

formulae enabling the identification of similar or

identical stratigraphic units located elsewhere within

the site in a way that vi sua 1 inspection, deemed to be

subjective, cannot. A major aim of the excavation was to

determine the sensitivity of the overburden in a way

which would permit quicker and more meaningful excavation

in future. Statistical patterning should provide

objective criteria on which to determine which

stratigraphic units can be stripped off mechanically and

which require archaeological investigation.

Though only 2% of the site was investigated, 60 cubic

metres of material was removed by hand and of this over

50 tonnes was subjected to detailed quantification. This

is a sufficient sample to permit valid statistical

results.

10.1 Comparison of Sand Units.

Yellow sand was identified subjectively by the excavation

team as being drift sand, disco 1 ou red sand, brown, grey

or black, as being introduced or disturbed. Since over

3 7 tonnes of the overburden was sand, statist i ca 1

analysis should produce quantification figures to permit

immediate identification of similar units.

In the main a statistical difference is apparent.

Discoloured sand produced an average artefact yield of

84


0.71% of matrix weight, the yellow sand only 0.37% (for

details see Appendix 4 Table 1) and this figure is

distorted by the inclusion of Unit 212 which contained,

in the quadrats adjacent to the west barracks wall (Unit

226) a yield of 0.94%, mainly brick. Excluding this

Unit, the average reduces to 0.09%.

However, Unit 212 is above the average weight yield for

discoloured sand while several Units of the latter

material fell within the range of 0.09 - 0.37%: Unit 105,

which included pressed brick and modern glass (0.25%),

Unit 106 which lay immediately above the occupation and

demolition debris (0.26% and Units 209, 210 and 211 which

comprised disturbed fill (0.1%, 0.18% and 0.22%

respectively).

The conclusion, therefore, is that subjective

identification

quantification.

based on colour is more valid that

10.2 Area 1 Spatial Distribution.

Fundamental to South's artefact distribution patterns

Historica.l (Stanley South, Method and

Archaeology, New York,

Archaeology, Historical

223-230; Historic Site

1977;

American

Content,

American . Antiquity

architectural debris

44 No.2,

increases

Theory in

Pattern

Antiquity

Structure

Recognition in

43 No.2, 1978,

and Function,

1979, 213-237) is that

with the p-roximity of the

destroyed building. The only structural evidence in Area

1 was what appeared to be part of a rammed earth floor in

the west end (Unit 112, Quadrats CDS), though the area

uncovered

identification.

was too

Since

small to

the former

permit

building in

conclusive

this part

of the site is known to have run from north to south and

to have been timber framed, distribution of iron, usually

found in the form of nails, east to west should produce a diagnostic pattern. It does not.

85

I I I


Figure 57 shows the distribution of iron east to west

based on numbers and weight (for figures see

Table 2). Quadrats CD8 yielded amongst the

amount of iron.

UNITS 109 & 110 DISTRIBUTION OF IRON

~~.

r .. ~ IN

100.

UNITS

Figure 57. Bar chart showing distribution of iron, Units 109 & 110.

Appendix 4

smallest

80

70

60

so

40

30

20

10

This anomaly was checked by comparing iron content with

the weight of the matrix (Figure 58). The result is the

same.

10.3 Area 2 Unit 212 Spatial Distribution.

In Part 2.3 it was stated that the drift sand was so low

in artefact yield that it could be stripped off

mechanically except where adjacent to structural

features. The drift sand in Area 2 was divided into that

above the wall, Unit 207, which had an artefact yield of

only 0.06% on weight and that level with the surviving

section of the west barracks wall, Unit 212. The two

main artefact types found in this Unit were brick (CEW)

which had fallen from the wall and mid-late nineteenth

86


~GE DISTRIBUTION OF IRON AGAINST TOTAL UNIT WEIGHT

UN ITS 109 & 110

C02 CD3 CD4 CDS CD6 CD7 CDS

1.0

0.9

0.8

0.7

o.6

0.5

0.4

0.3

0.2

0.1

Figure 58. Bar chart showing distribution of iron Units 109 & 110 against total Unit weight.

century g 1 ass ( GL) apparent 1 y the refuse of a 1 coho 1 i cs

frequenting a deserted site and taking shelter behind the

survivin_g wall. Figures 59 and 60 show the distribution

of these types east and west of the wall (fGr the figures

on which they are based see Appendix 4 Tables 3 & 4).

87


50kg

40kg

30kg

20kg

10kg

UNIT ~12

BRICK DISTRIBUTION

WALL WALL

WEST EAST WEST EAST

WEIGHT NUMBER

.

!"'-

r""""' __,

- ~'-r- r-r-

_C

Figure 59. Bar chart sho'tJing distribution of brick Unit 212

80

70

60

51)

40

30

20

10

88

I I. I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

UNIT 212

·. t;LASS (OTHER THAN WINDOW) DISTRIBUTION

3kg

2kg

1kg

WALL WALL

WEST EAST WEST EAST

WEIGHT NUMBER

50

40

30

20

10

Figure 60. Bar chart showing distribution of glass Unit 212.

Whilst the result$ are marred by the fact that little of

this Unit could be excavated in Quadrats DES-7 and 09,

the pattern shown is too marked for this to be relevant.

89


10.4 Area 3 Spatial Distribution.

Units 302 and 303 contained debris associated with the

occupation of the Stationmaster's House and the plan of

its garden. Analysis of the material sought to determine

spatial distribution which might prove relevant to future

excavation.

Figure 61 shows the

tableware, household china

in the upper occupation

distribution

and glass

Unit (Unit

of kitchenware,

and personal items

302) in number and

weight based on percentages of the whole (for figures see

DISTRIBUTION OF KITCHENWARE, TABLEWARE, HOUSEHOLD GLASS & CHINA AND PERSONAL ITEMS IN lAGES, UNIT 302

A1 A2 A3 A4 AS

07.AGE NO.

17.AGE WEIGHT

B1 B2 B3 B4 BS

Figure 61. Bar chart showing distribution of household ceramics & glass & personal items Unit 302.

A6

B6

201.

10"1.

201.

107.

90


Appendix 4 Table 5). While Quadrat B6 shows an anomaly,

a clear pattern is discernible. The area closest to the

house (Quadrats AB1-2 & A3) produce the most.

The Unit immediate 1 y be 1 ow, however, indicated the

opposite trend (Figure 62; for figures see Appendix 4

Table 6).

DISTRIBUTION OF KITCHENWARE, TABLEWARE, HOUSEHOLD GLASS & CHINA AND PERSnNAL ITEMS IN 7.AGES, UNIT 303 73.4%

A1 A2 A3 A4 A5

D'7..AGE NO,

17.AGE WEIGHT

B1 B2 B3 B4 B5 B6

Figure 62. Bar chart showing distribution of household ceramics & glass & personal items Unit 303.

307.

207.

107.

301.

20'7.

10'7.

That the reason for this could 1 ie in a mixture of the

two Units during occupation no longer discernible in the

matrix (the division between the Units was clear) was

tested against the distribution of heavy salt-glazed

91


stoneware garden tiles and flower pot fragments (for

figures see Appendix 4 Table 7). Although the latter

were distributed

in both Units,

marked disparity.

upper Unit were

the lower.

fairly evenly across the excavated area

distribution

The quadrats

of garden tiles

which had no tiles

precisely those which contained

showed a

in the

them in

On this basis the distribution of house hoi d and personal

items in the two Units were combined (for figures see

Appendix 4 Table 8). The result (Figure 63) supports the

original distribution pattern indicating a higher yield

DISTRIBUTION OF KITCHENWARE, TABLEWARE, HOUSEHOLD GLASS & CHINA AND PERSONAL ITEMS IN tAGES, UNITS 302 & 303

Al A2 A3 A4 A5 A6

07.AGE NO,

1·7.AGE

.WEIGHT

Bl B2 B3 B4 BS B6

Figure 63. Bar chart showing distribution of household ceramics & glass & personal items Units 302 & 303.

307.

207.

lOt

307.

207.

107.

92

I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

'I I I

: I

close to the house and furthest from it. This cannot

considered an indicator for future excavation.

twelve square metres were dug and the Area was

selected on the basis of anticipated artefact yield.

10.5 Analysis of Base Marks and Coins.

Area 1.

be

Only

not

Units 109 and 110 i mmed i a tel y above the convict

occupation level were considered by the excavation team

to relate either to post-convict occupation or to the

destruction of the building in this area. An 1856 half-

sovereign minted in Sydney found in Unit 110 suggests the

former.

Area 2.

The excavation

of dark sand

team considered that Unit 220, a deposit

containing burnt wood and charcoal located

close to the footings of the west wall of the 1816

barracks (Unit 229), was associated with the 1851 fire

and pre-1851 occupation of the building. Two coins were

apart: an 1826

IV halfpenny.

years suggests

found in this Unit only a hand's breadth

William IV sixpence and an 1829 George

Given an estimated usage I ife of twenty

that this

fallen the

therefore

occupation

Area 3.

Unit contains sub-floor

charred

that it

remains

relates

before the fire.

of

both

deposits into

the timber

to the fire

which

floor·

and

The general impression of the materjal recovered

has

and

to

from

Units 302 and 303, the occupation levels adjacent to the

Stationmaster's House, was that they dated to the 1920s

and 1930s.

93

--~------------------------------------------------------- --

! I

I I I I I I I I I

I I I I

I I I I I I I I I

Neither the bottle glass nor the clay

assistance in accurate dating but

ceramic tableware bore manufacturer's

pipes

a few

base

found were of

fragments of

marks. They

proved to be of little assistance in solving the

confusion caused by the distribution pattern and the

sinking

Unit.

of the stoneware garden tiles into the lower

Unit 303, the upper of the two, contained a porcelain

plate marked SALON CHINA/S & N/L. •• /MADE IN ENGLAND. The

initials appear to refer to Salt & Nixon of Longton who

operated only between 1897 and 1904. The lower Unit

yielded a plate marked PHOENIX WARE/MADE

S. L TO, apparently made by T.Forester

IN ENGLAND/T.F.&

& Sons Limited

which began in about 1891 but which continued in

production until 1959. Of little more assistance was a

porcelain saucer marked SUPERIOR ENGLISH BELL CHINA/SHORE

& COGGINS/LONGTON. This firm began in 1911. (Geoffrey A.

Godden, Encyclopaedia of British Pottery and

Marks, London, 1972)This Unit also contained two

1917 penny and a 1919 threepence. Only the

dating of 1920s or 1930s is confirmed. On the

the coins, the latter decade is preferred.

10.5 Social Status.

The Stationmaster's House is a more grandiose

than the Paymaster's Office, formerly the

Porcelain

coins, a

general

basis of

structure

cottage

occupied

built,

which

by the berthing master, which, being brick

cottages

This

in the

is of higher status than the small timber

stood on the Sc.ott Street frontage.

difference in social status should be reflected

artefacts

is little

found in association

comparative material

with each. As yet there

from the Lumber Yard site,

but some observations

excavation.

can be made as a result of the 1989

I II I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I I

The percentage of porcelain

indicator

in ceramic tableware is

considered a major of social status.

cup and saucer

Classification

price index for 1881 (George L.

and Economic Scaling of 19th

Ceramics, Historical Archaeology 14, 1980, 1-40)

value of 6 for porcelain as compared to 4 for

printed fine earthenware and 3.33 for ironstone

Miller's

Miller,

Century

gives a

transfer

china,

here mainly falling into the category of vitreous

stoneware but which includes other forms of hard fired

or very simp I y earthenware which was usually undecorated

decorated. The value of other ceramics is even lower.

Relative values for later years reflect the same pattern.

Between 1895 and 1897 the average price per dozen for

porcelain cups and saucers was 4.12 as against 1.49 for

transfer printed earthenware, 1.26 for moulded and 1.10

for undecorated earthenwares, Between 1900 and 1909 the

figures were 2.87 1.7 1.07 : 0.68 and for 1922-1927

6.10 for porcelain, 2.52 for moulded china and 2.21 for

undecorated ware (Susan L. Henry, Factors Influencing

Consumer Behaviour in Turn-of-the-Century Phoenix,

Arizona, in Suzanne M. Spencer-Wood, Ed., Consumer Choice

in Historical Archaeology, New York, 1987. Unfortunately

no value is given for transfer printed ware in the latter

period but on the basis of earlier figures it would have

been about 4.0).

Whilst these prices are American (no similar analysis has

been made in Australia), they must be relevant to

Australia in that both countries were flooded with the

products of English mass-production.

lower of the occupation Units In Unit 303, the

the Stationmaster's House,

adjoining

33% on 38% on number and

weight of the ceramics were porcelain. This is a high-

status indicator

was, in fact,

and it must be remembered that the house

not that of the stationmaster

traffic controller, a man of higher status

but of the

than the

95

I :I I

II

I I I I I

II I I I I I I I I I I I __ --

Newcastle stationmaster.

In the Unit above (Unit

on number and 22% on

302) the percentage

weight (excluding

drops to 19~

two sherds of

Japanese porcelain). This may indicate

status of the occupants. None the less,

is high.

a drop in the

the proportion

The only other stratigraphic Unit which can be associated

with domestic occupation

which is associated with

is Unit 208,

one of the small

on Scott Street. It yielded only

sherds, but none of them was porcelain.

the dog's grave

timber cottages

fourteen ceramic

96

Documents

I DATE DUE Inswaol.library.usyd.edu.au/data/pdfs/22442_ID_Bairstow... · 2015-02-02 · back-up facilities in the form of site clearance and survey, earth-moving equipment and the