Marginal Returns and Fringe Benefirs
Shanks, M. and Tilley, C. 1992 Re-Constructing Archaeology:
Theury and Practice. New York: Routledge.
Smith, M.A. 1986 The antiquity of seedgrinding in arid Australia. Archaeology in Oceania 2 1:29-39.
Smith, M.A. 1988 The pattern and timing of prehistoric
settlement in central Australia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis,
University of New England, Armidale.
Smith, M.A. 1989 The case for a resident population in the
central Australian ranges during full glacial aridity. Archaeology in Oceania 24:93-105.
Smith, M.A. 1993 Biogeography, human ecology and prehistory
in the sandridge deserts. Australian Archaeology 37:
35 -50.
Smith, M.A.and Sharp, N.D. 1993 Pleistocene sites in Australia, New Guinea and Island Melanesia: Geographic and
temporal structure of the archaeological record. In M.A.
Smith, M. Spriggs and B. Fankhauser (eds) Sahul in Review.. Pleistocene Archaeology in Australia, New Guinea
and Island Melanesia, pp.37-59. Canberra: Department of
Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National University. Occasional Papers in Prehistory, No. 24.
Smith, M.A., Williams, E. and Wasson, R.J. 1991 The archaeology of the JSN site: Some implications for the dynamics
of human occupation in the Strezelecki Desert during the
Late Pleistocene. Records of the South Australian Museum
25(2): 175-92.
Stafford-Smith, D.M. and Moreton, S.K. 1990 A framework for
the ecology of arid Australia. Jmimal nf Arid Environments 18:255-78.
Sutton, P. 1990 The pulsating heart: Large scale cultural and
demographic processes in Aboriginal Australia.
In
B. Meehan and N. White (eds) Hunter-Gazherer Demography, pp.7 1-80. Sydney: University of Sydney. Oceania
Monograph 39.
Veth, P. 1987 Martujarra prehistory: Variation in arid zone
adaptations. Australian Archaeology 25: 102-11.
Veth, P. 1989a Islands in the interior: A model for the colonisation of Australia's arid zone. Archaeology in Oceania
24(3):8 1-92.
Veth, P. 1989b The prehistory of the Sandy Deserts: Spatial and
temporal variation in settlement and subsistence behaviour
within the arid zone of Australia. Ph.D. thesis, University
of Western Australia, Perth.
Veth, P.M. 1993 Islands in the Interior: The dynamics of
prehistoric adaptations within the arid zone of Australia.
Michigan: Ann Arbor. International Monographs in Prehistory 3.
Veth, P.M. and Walsh, F.J. 1988 The concept of 'staple' plant
foods in the Western Desert region of Western Australia.
Austialian Aboriginal Studies 2: 19-25.
Veth. P., Hamm, G. and Larnpert, R.J. 1990 The archaeological
significance of the lower Cooper Creek. Records of fhe
South Australian Museum 24:43-66.
g$
Victorian offshore islands in a mainland coastal economy
Denise ~aughwin'and Richard ~ullaga6
In English literature, the sea is often seen as a testing
ground for the human spirit, and islands, like ships,
provide a ready literary &vice for isolating people from
society and their familiar activities. However, islands need
not isolate people, but can be part of a broader economic
and social system. We argue that Aboriginal exploitation
of Victorian offshore islands was certainly part of a mainland economic system but question the degree to which
island resources were integral to its operation. We examine the hypothesis that this mainland system focused not
on marine resources but rather on the wetlands and forests
of the coastal plains. This hypothesis can in part be tested
from mainland coastal sites but as they are geographically
located on the margin between terrestrial and marine
resources it is difficult to isolate the marine component of
technology and settlement. Islands, on the other hand, are
surrounded by a marine environment and require a marine
technology to visit and exploit. We suggest that the
terrestrial resources of the small Victorian islands were not
significant. In this paper we examine both historical and
Department of Classics and Archaeology, University of Melbourne.
Parkville, Vic 3052, Australia
Division of Anthropology, ?he Australian Museum, PO Box A285.
Sydney South, NSW 2000, Aushalia
archaeological evidence in order to assess three aspects of
the marine technology: frequency of and reasons for island
visitation; watercraft; and stone tool production. This
survey will provide data that will clarify the use of the
islands in Victoria as well as further our knowledge of
economies and settlement history on the adjacent mainland territories.
Models
Humans have exploited littoral resources from at least
300,000 years ago when shellfish were harvested from the
Mediterranean coast (DeLumley 1969). At least 30,000
years of coastal exploitation on the margins of the western
Pacific are documented in New Guinea (Allen et al. 1988),
but evidence of marine exploitation in the Pleistocene is
very rare (see also Godfrey 1989 on the Southern Ocean,
and Morse 1988; O'Connor 1989 on the Indian Ocean).
Although there is a wealth of evidence suggesting use of
marine resources in Holocene prehistory from many parts
of Australia, the importance of these resources in the
overall system is not clear. Nevertheless, marine resources
figure prominently in discussions of proposed cultural
change during the mid- to late Holocene (e.g. Beaton
1985). Recent research into maritime and island
Australian Archaeology. N umher 40. 1995
Gaughwin and Fullagar
archaeology has identified three problems relevant to our
aims in this paper: a definition of 'coastal economy', the
range of factors affecting island use and the issue of site
preservation.
Definition of a marine economy
There is a need to define what is meant by the terms
'coastal economy' and 'marine economy' (see Gaughwin
1983). Although found in many sites along the Australian
coast, food remains from the sea are frequently dominated
by resources of the intertidal zone. For the purposes of
this paper we do not consider this as a marine economy
since it involves no special adaptation to the full range of
marine resources and environments. We prefer to use the
term coastal economy, one which functions on coastal
landforms including the coastal margins, the coastal plains
and the coastal hills. Rather than oriented to the full
range of marine resources, a coastal economy can be
viewed as an extension of a land based adaptation.
Our expectations of what constitutes a marine economy
are threefold. Firstly we would expect a high level of use
of marine resources from all zones including the intertidal,
the subtidal and the offshore zones. Secondly there ought
to be an appropriate technology which must include
adequate offshore watercraft but may also include fish
hooks, gouges, nets and specialised spears. Thirdly, there
is an expectation that a fairly high proportion of the diet
comes from the sea and that the coastal margins were
occupied regularly.
Following on this, it is necessary to consider the difference between islands and mainland coasts. Some aspects
are self evident: islands are offshore having varying
distances of sea between them and the mainland, they are
small in area and bounded by the sea on all sides. The
terrestrial part is limited in the range of species present.
In contrast to the relative poverty of the land, the sea
surrounding islands is often rich in fish. The terrestrial
niche is often occupied by colonies of those species that
feed at sea and breed onshore such as sea mammal and
seabird colonies. The configuration of most islands means
that there is a greater proximity to a variety of marine
environments than in most mainland coastlines of similar
length. Overall the main food items available on offshore
islands are animal rather than plant. Although there may
be some edible plants on some islands, much of the fauna
living there relies on the sea for food. This is particularly
true for the smallest islands. As islands increase in size
they take on more characteristics of mainland locations.
Island visitation in Tasmania and
New South Wales
Some basic parameters controlling the use of islands
have been defined for the southeastern Australian coast.
Jones (1976) suggested distance offshore, the prevailing
currents, winds and swell; the size of the island; and the
length of its coastline. He argued that the motives for
travel to islands were the extremely rich food resources;
muttonbirds, seals, seabirds and rocky coast shellfish. His
discussion centred on Tasmania where some islands are
thought to have been extensively exploited with some of
the larger ones supporting year-round occupation. Jones
Australian Archaeology, Number 40, 1995
argued that the islands off the northeast coast were not
visited at all due to cultural reasons.
Sullivan (1982) noted an increase in the use of islands
off the New South Wales coast in the last one thousand
years with most being first used in the last two thousand
years. She considered their role in the region and suggested that they were very similar to mainland sites except
that there was considerably more bone in the island sites
and of course the species were different. She argued that
the increased visitation of the islands reflected an increase
in the sophistication of technology, especially canoes,
which may have been improved after the development of
line fishing made their use essential. Therefore, while the
birds and seals and other resources on the islands were
important Sullivan believed that it was the lure of better
fishing which initially attracted people offshore.
Site preservation
The nature of site preservation needs to be discussed
because it is important to understand the representativeness of archaeological samples. For example, we need to
know if certain types of sites have been destroyed and if
unusually well-preserved sites have atypical contents. A
main reason for the rarity of Pleistocene coastal sites is
that sea level changes have hidden or destroyed the evidence. Along the Victorian coast most existing islands
formed during the Holocene. All existing Victorian
islands are part of the continental shelf and were part of
the mainland during the last glaciation. Islands such as
Great Glennie and Lady Julia Percy (Fig. l), would have
formed first, as rising postglacial sea levels were between
25 and 50 m below the present high-water mark, that is
between 9000 and about 13,000 years ago (Thom and
Chappell 1975; Jones 1977). With respect to more recent
island formation there is little detailed information concerning mid-Holocene tectonic adjustments to transgressions by the sea rise. However, even under conditions of a
stable sea level, sites and land may have been destroyed
(Head 1983, 1987). Models of prehistoric change based on
atypical sites must be treated with caution.
The problem of site preservation may be minimised in
at least two ways. Firstly, ethnographic, taphonomic and
geomorphic studies can indicate the kinds of sites and
information which might be lost. It is then possible to
make predictions about particular archaeological situations. For example, open beach camps probably did exist
and have been destroyed, except in unusual circumstances
such as situations with raised beaches or boulder emplacements. If such an erosional model is acceptable, the
latter situations may provide plausible evidence of a
general settlement and subsistence pattern if it can be
demonstrated that the conditions permitting preservation
did not also significantly influence settlement and subsistence. We argue in this paper that the ethnographic data
and archaeological data are in agreement on the issue of
marine exploitation despite possible erosion and destniction of sites. Although many sites may have been destroyed by erosional processes we suggest that a repfesentative range of coastal sites has been preserved. Direct
disturbance by Europeans is difficult to assess, though less
Victorian Ofshore Islands in a Mainland Coastal Economy
S wAa n - >
e
n
c
h
r-l
Doughboy
n- C h r ~ r p h i l l
Bennison
Lady J u l i a P e r c y
S t Margret
Sunday
Shellback, Norman,
Gt.Glennie. Dannevig
Citadel, McHugh,
Cleft, Kanowanna,
Anser, Wattle.
/‘;\
Figure 1
Rabbit
Rodondo
-
0
l OOkm
Islands off the Victorian coast.
sons Promontory from heavy swells through Bass Strait.
The more exposed western side of the Promontory also has
a number of islands including Great Glennie in the Glennie group. Moving west, Western Port Bay contains two
large islands and a number of smaller ones. Port Phillip
Bay has only one island of any size and further west on the
margin of the Southern Ocean there are only four more.
Table 1 indicates the distance offshore by the shortest
route, the size of the island and the height above sea level.
The nature of the island is further described as being of a
predominantly coastal type. High energy islands are those
exposed to the full blast of the sea. They typically have
rocky coastlines with small bays, stunted salt affected
vegetation and are the favoured habitat for marine feeding
animals such as seals and seabirds. Medium energy
islands are protected from the strong winds and swell and
are more likely to develop sandy coastlines. While marine
animals do live on them they may also have terrestrial
animals (depending on their size) 'and the vegetation more
Methods
closely resembles the adjacent mainland away from the
We approach these questions from an overview of the immediate coastal margins. Low energy islands are in
use of islands and the methods of traveling offshore in the very protected locations and have muddy or sandy mud
historic period. A synthesis of the archaeological data is coasts. They tend to be low lying and away from the immealso provided. The aspects reported are site survey data diate coastal margins and are very similar to mainland coastal
including the presence or absence of sites on all Victorian plains. Some of a e larger islands may have all of these
islands and an analysis of site distribution on those islands coast types. Therefore, while it is possible to classify
with available data; Phillip, Gabo, French. Comparisons islands in one set, the range in types is quite broad.
with survey results on adjacent mainland coasts are made
to make it possible to identify those traits which are Historical accounts
At Mallacoota Inlet, Robinson (1844:lOO cited in
peculiar to islands. In those cases where excavations have
been completed it is possible to discuss chronology and to Coutts et al. 1954:20) observed canoes on the inlet that
detail subsistence strategies and the stone technology. A were made from bark sheets about 10 feet long, tied at
case study from Great Glennie Island is presented to both ends and bad wooden ribs. Further west we find
illustrate changes in island use which parallel changes on mention of canoes on the Gippsland Lakes where fishing
was so common that Robinson (Mackaness 194 1 :1 1 ) wrote
the adjacent mainland economies.
'the Aborigines may be termed Icthyophagist' while their
The Victorian islands
canoes were made of 'a sheet of bark from the straight part
Although there are many small outcrops that could be of a tree fol&d at the end.' Interestingly, Robinson goes
designated islands, we have concentrated on the larger on to comment that 'Bark frcm the convex part is the
ones which are summarised in Table 1 and their locations simple form used by the natives of the Murray and other
illustrated in Figure 1. Gabo, on the edge of the Tasman parts of rhe Interior' suggesting that these canoes were part
Sea, is the only island between the New South Wales of a technology designed for quiet inland waters. No
border and Wilsons Promontory. There are a number of canoes were ohservecl on the ocean \ide of Ninety Mile
islands in Corner Inlet which are well protected by Wil- Bach.
than 17% of the Victorian mast is comprised of townships
and agricultural land (Zallar et al. 1979:8). There is no
evidence to suggest that disturbance on islands has been
greater than on the mainland. In fact, their isolation has
probably helped to protect them. The impact of sealing
and lighthouse construction has not been assessed in this
study, but observations on Gabo Island, for example,
suggest that sites have been partially disturbed (e.g. by a
boat ramp) rather than totally destroyed.
Secondly, by inferring the most general relationships,
it may be possible to cut loose from those factors which are
specific and unique to a particular site. For example, even
if only a few stone artefacts, such as a single blade core
and microdebitage, are found at a site, they may provide
good evidence for a general stone flaking technology. One
of the general relationships examined in this paper is the
relationship between stone flaking and movements of
people to exploit resources within a coastal economy.
Artstrolicrn Archnenlugy, Number 40. 1995
Victorian mshore Islands in a Mainland Coastal Economy
made boat and went over only once plenty tumble - plenty of swans, kangaroo rats, but no
kangaroos or opposum - they were said to be
plenty frightened. (Thomas ML2, 12 February
1840)
Port Phillip Bay is the most extensive bay on the Victorian coast and has many well sheltered harbours, yet
here accounts of canoes are very scanty. Some of the early
European visitors explicitly noted their absence. Hinders
(1814:219) after exploring the bay for seven days in May
1802 commented 'I am not certain whether they have
canoes, but none were seen.'
Similarly Tuckey (1803:121) who was with the first
official settlement at Sorrento in 1801-1802 commented on
the absence of canoes
No appearance of Canoes or water conveyances
of any kind was seen and the circumstance
seems to verify what I have already said about
the scarcity of fish in the harbour.
References to canoes in the Port Phillip area all relate
to seeing them in use on the rivers and lagoons (Tuckey
1803). Lourandos (1980: 118), who thoroughly reviewed
Robinson's journals, obtained no fm evidence for the use
of canoes in the Western District of Victoria.
Further west to the South Australian border there are
no references to canoes on coastal or near coastal water
(see Luebbers 1978; Anell 1960; Lampert 1981). The
word for canoe appears in a vocabulary list for the Mt
Gambier district and Luebbers (1978:74) suggests this
refers to a small watercraft used on the Glenelg River.
This pattern extends across the whole of southern Australia (Larnpert 1981; Dortch et al. 1984).
Swimming has not been reviewed to the same extent.
Although there are some references to swimming across
rivers, none we have located indicate swimming to offshore islands. Thomas (ML2 11 January 1840) gives a
good account of a river crossing complete with an illustration (Fig. 2):
Figure 2
Rough sketch of Aboriginal person swimming. Redrawn
after: Thomas ML2 1 1, January 1840.
they wind up long grass (and) soon make a cord
(to) tie their skin that covers them in a heap on
the top of (the) head and swim over. (They) do
not swim like a white man or so fast, like swans
or duck they work their hands under their kllies and not spreading out like we swim. you
cannot see their legs, men women and children
all alike. I never saw one dive but walk in till of
their depth and then go on as in this position.
Some of the islands in Victoria are within easy swimming
distance of the mainland and could have been reached by
this method.
Summary ofhistorical evidence
Some conclusions can be drawn from this summary of
the historical references to Aboriginal people crossing
bodies of water. It is clear that the technology of canoe
making was known with several varieties in use. None of
the canoes appear to have any special adaptations to make
them more seaworthy, rather they appear designed for use
on the quieter waters of lakes and rivers. This correlates
with the infrequent use of canoes on salt water and the few
mentions of Aborigines travelling to offshore islands.
The reasons for offshore travel appear to be varied.
Many of the recorded instances suggest islands were
visited in exceptional circumstances, usually to escape
from or to attack enemies. At other times travel was
undertaken to exploit seasonal resources especially birds
and their eggs. The evidence in the historical accounts
suggests a much heavier use of watercraft on freshwater
bodies. On rivers, lakes and lagoons watercraft was used
primarily for fishing and less commonly for transporting
people and their gear.
Canoes became less common moving west around the
Victorian coast and they disappear altogether west of Port
Phillip. Coinciding with this absence, there are no accounts of travel offshore on the west coast of Victoria The
overall conclusion based on this data is that in the eariy
nineteenth century islands were infrequently visited, there
was little specialisation directed toward island use either in
terms of the development of appropriate technology or in
fixing their role as an integral part of the economy.
Archaeological evidence of island visitation
While not all islands have been surveyed for archaeological sites a number have now been explored and the
summary of the results is listed in Table l. The sources
for these archaeological data come predominantly from
site records compiled by Gaughwin and members of the
Victoria Archaeological Survey, where the site records are
lodged. Gill and West (1971) reported on stone artefacts
and Aboriginal associations with Lady Julia Percy Island.
Archaeological excavations have been undertaken on Gabo
(Fullagar 1984), Great Glennie (Jones and Allen 1979,
1980, 1985; Head et al. 1983) and Phillip (Gaughwin
1983, in progress, Gaughwin and Brennan 1986). The
main foci of coastal archaeology by the Victoria Archaeological Survey have been summarised in several papers
and unpublished reports (see Coutts et al. 1981, 1984;
Coutts 1981a and 1981b).
Table 1 indicates some parameters are operating in
controlling the use of the islands. While many of the
islands are close to the mainland, others, notably Great
Glennie and Lady Julia Percy are at considerable distances. Thus distance does not appear to be important.
The s i ~ euf h e islaud or its height abuve sea level do not
appear to influence which of the islands are used. It does
A ~cstrcrlicrnA rchcreology. Number 40. 1995
Gaughwin and Ficllugar
which specific activities predominate while others represent a more generalised economy. The overall impression
is that the marine resources are of less importance than
those of the estuary and inland.
appear that those islands surveyed which had no sites or
very small numbers of sites (French, Elizabeth, Churchill,
Snake) are all in protected waters. Such locations have
low energy coasts with muddy, mangrove-lined shores and
those resources commonly associated with islands such as
seal and seabirds are absent. They are thus rather morz
like many mainland locations but without the variety
found there. In order to more fully explore the question of
island use, those areas with detailed studies, Western Port
Bay islands (Gaughwin 1983; Gaughwin and Brennan
1986), Gabo (Fullagar 1984) and Great Glennie (Jones and
Allen 1980) are more fully discussed.
Wilsons Promontory
Great Glennie Island lies west of Wilsons Promontory.
This island lies about 7 km offshore and suitable watercraft would have been necessary to accomplish the journey.
No intensive survey of Great Glennie Island has been
reported although an excavation of a midden in a cave
(GGII1) has been reported (Jones and Allen 1979, 1980,
1985; Head et al. 1983). This site with a basal date of
185h120 (ANU-3832) is made up of five prehistoric
occupation layers. It is made up of rock platform shellfish
(predominantly limpets), bone, charcoal and stone artefacts. The interpretation of the site has been summarised
as the result of
a series of rare and short term visits .separated
by substantial periods of time of about 1500
years and ephemeral visits ... perhaps single
visits for a few days by a small number of people (Head et al. 1983:103).
A more detailed analysis of the stone tools at this site
forms the case study discussed below.
The major work on the nearby mainland by Coutts
(1970) has been recently supplemented by the Victoria
Archaeological Survey, the results of which are currently
being synthesised and not yet available. Coutts (1970)
identified two periods of Aboriginal occupation. The
earlier, Yanakie A, predates the earliest visit to Great
Glennie. Between six and a half and three thousand years
ago the Yanakie A people appear to have gone to Wilsons
Promontory for brief visits and engaged in shellfish
harvesting and a little hunting. In the later Yanakie B
period of the last 1000 years, the Aborigines also appear to
have made short visits to the area and supplemented the
Eastern Victoria
Gabo Island is the most eastern island in Victoria. A
survey of the island located 20 sites most of which are
shell middens dominated by rock platform shellfish. Very
few stone artefacts were found and bone was not observed
in any quantity on the sites. An excavation on the island
produced a basal date for occupation of 9 5 b 8 0 BP (SUA1455). Preliminary analysis of the excavated material led
Fullagar (1984) to conclude that the site was probably a
fishing camp where the diet was supplemented with seal
and shellfish. Analysis of the bone is still in progress but
it is evident that although bone weights are dominated by a
few seal bones, the weight of fish bone is still quite significant in the lower three units (Table 2). A minimum of 45
Labridae (parrot fish and wrasses) have been identified on
the basis of lower pharyngeal teeth. Interestingly, few bird
bones were recovered even though there is a large muttonbird rookery on the island at present. On the nearby
mainland intensive survey and excavation of the coastal
margin sites has been undertaken. Fullagar, who surveyed
the high energy coasts west of Mallacoota Inlet summarised his findings as the result of 'a sporadic exploitation of
coastal resources and an intensive exploitation of estuarine
and swamp environ~nentsnear the forests' (1984:252).
Layer
1
2
3
4
Table 2
Weight all Bone
(9)
57.4
41 1 .O
229.5
30.9
O/O
Oh
Oh
Mammal
Fish
Bird
43
80
61
79
3
19
39
15
0
1
0
6
Reptile and
Unidentified
54
0
<<l
0
MNI
Labridae
0
22
21
2
Summary of bone analysis from Gabo Island excavation.
In Mallacoota Inlet itself, the picture is one of utilisation of estuarine resources with a particular emphasis on
shellfish harvesting and fishing. The 'rniddens are the
product of brief and intermittent occupation by small
groups of people over a long period of time' (McConnell
and Gunn 1984:205). An excavation of Captain Stevensons Point at the entrance to the Inlet indicated that the
site was used for relatively brief periods at a time and that
the contribution of marine resources was variable but
significant, however, given the poor recovery of plant
remains, the focus of the economy remained doubtful
(Coutts et al. 1984). Further up the inlet at Goanna Bay,
the main activity represented in a small excavation was
shellfish harvesting (Weaver 1985). Thus it appears that
in the Mallacoota region there are a number of sites at
Australian Archaeology. Number 40, 1995
basically shellfish diet with some hunting of land marnmds and birds, gathering of crustaceans, and a little
fishing. While Coutts (1970) does not make any suggestions of what their activities were away from the immediate coastal margins, we are left with the impression that
the major focus of activity is well away from the coast.
Western Port Bay
Western Port Bay contains 270 km of coastline which
includes Phillip Island, Seal Rocks, French Island, Elizabeth Island and Churchill Island as well as the mainland.
The sunfey of the Western Port Catchment recorded 266
archaeological cites (Gaughwin 1983). Of these 243 were
located on the coastal margins, the landform which was
most intensively surveyed. Although ground visibility was
Victorian Oflshre I s h d s in a Mainland Conrral Economy
variable, the entire coastline was considered to be adequately surveyed with the results reflecting the prehistoric
use. An obvious pattern of differential site distribution
emerged. Most sites were located on Phillip Island with
204 (76% of all sites in the survey) being found adjacent to
the high energy Bass Strait coastline. French Island,
although surveyed along the entire coastline, appeared to
be little used with only three sites being recorded. On the
other islands, Churchill and Elizabeth and Seal Rocks, no
sites wefe found. Any use of Seal Rocks by Aborigines
could well have been obliterated by the seals that move
over the whole of these small rocky islands. On the
mainland coastline 36 sites (15%) were recorded. These
cluster at two locations where the long fetch in the Bay has
meant that a medium wave energy prevails and rock
platforms are exposed. The five sites (2%) located on the
coastal margins adjacent to low energy shores are lithic
scatters with no evidence of shellfishing or any other
indicators of the use of the sea even though these resources
are available. Thus the overall distribution is, in terms of
frequency per landform/coastal type, the reverse of their
actual availability with the greatest number of sites on the
small stretch of Bass Strait coast, a low number on the
similarly small pieces of medium energy coasts with
virtually no sites being recovered on the two hundred
kilometres of low energy mudflat coasts.
The coastal middens on the islands are generally small
in volume. Of the few with in situ deposits, all were very
shallow with the depth range between 5 cm and 60 cm
(mean 10 cm) with the majority comprised of only one
depositional layer. Analysis of the surface contents of the
sites suggests foraging in the intertidal zone especially
shellfish collecting from the rock platforms. The stone
tools were predominantly manufactured from local flint
and quartz, both of which are available as beach pebbles.
Very little bone was recorded in these surface sites.
The above results combined with the evidence in historical accounts from the area led to the conclusion that
the coastal margins of the islands were incidental to the
annual economy and were only rarely utilised (Gaughwin
1983, 1984; Gaughwin and Sullivan 1984). Further
analysis of two excavated sites on Phillip Island has
confmed this idea. A small midden in a rockshelter on
the south coast of Phillip Island, Stinker Bay, was thought
to be the result of a short visit to this beach where the use
of intertidal resources was the major activity. There was
no indication that offshore marine resources were heavily
exploited in the very late, c. 250 years ago, prehistoric
period (Gaughwin and Brennan 1986).
At Point Grant opposite Seal Rocks another midden,
with a basal date of 19OOMl BP (Beta-7064) shows a
greater variety in contents with shell still making up the
bulk of the site. However here fish and bird bones are
more common and at least one seal is present. Work on
the analysis is in progress by one of the authors (DG)and
completion of this will add further dimensions to our
knowledge of the use of this island. The current evidence
from the islands of Western Port suggests that those with
high energy coastlines and concomitant rock platforms
were visited for short periods to harvest shellfish and other
44
easily available foods. Where the islands had only a low
energy shore they do not appear to have been visited.
Placing this data in a regional context highlights the
lack of intensity of use of coastal resources. In the Westem Port Catchment, the coastal swamps and lightly
forested plains were the main focus of Aboriginal activity
while the coastal margins were only rarely utilised. An
excavation of a midden at Corinella has illustrated that
even on the medium energy shores shellfish collecting is
the only activity represented in the site (Brennan 1987).
To the east of Western Port a survey located 90 sites in a
stretch of 20 km of coastal dunes (Frankel et al. 1989). An
analysis of the sites led to the conclusior~that 'the low
volume of material in the dunes suggests a low level of
use' by Aborigines (Hall 1986:73). A more complex
situation was recorded on the Mornington Peninsula where
Sullivan (1981:96) suggests that there was regular movement of small groups of people 'between the resources of
the Bass Strait coastline and the northern part which
borders on Western Port, where once again the swamps
and terrestrial fauna of the plains were significant. Here
too the low energy coasts appear to have had little use with
no sites located near this beach type. Excavation of two of
the Bass Strait middens has been undertaken and the
analysis is nearly complete. The sites are characterised by
a predominance of shellfish remains, a few hearth stones,
charcoal with some crustacean and very little animal bone
(Geering pers. comm.). Thus they appear to be specifically oriented to the marine intertid zone.
The broad picture of the use of the Western Port region
therefore suggests a low, relatively infrequent use of the
coastal margins, perhaps with the exception of the Mornington Peninsula. There appears to be greater emphasis
on high and medium energy coasts regardless of whether
they occur on the mainland or on offshore islands. The
ready availability of large swamps and tracts of open forest
appear to have had far greater attraction for the Aborigines
of the recent past.
Summary of economic data
A clear and consistent picture emerges from the economic data available from the Victorian coast. We see a
relatively low use of marine resources, low rates of visitation and no particular adaptations to the marine environment. Although islands have very rich seasonal resources
these do not appear to have played an important role in the
economies of the Aborigines. It is interesting that seals
and muttonbirds do not appear in great numbers in sites
although in the spring and summer months these are
available in vast numbers (see Gaughwin 1978). Where
islands are visited, their use appears to be very similar to
mainland coastal areas. The concentration on the intertidal zone with shellfishing as the main focus of activity
suggests that while the Aborigines of the recent past
practised a coastal economy they were not involved in a
marine economy. The one exception to this is the apparently greater emphasis on fishing identified at Gabo and
Great Glennie (see below for more detail) and at Point
Grant on Phillip Island. While none of these sites could be
described as the result of a specific fishing strategy they
Australian Archaeology. Number 40. 1995
Gnirghwin and Fulhgnr
nevertheless have greater numbers of fish bone than
those on nearby mainland coastlines (e.g. Corinella 3,
Yanakie B, or Captain Stevensons Point).
Stone technology: Coastal and island toolkits
Archaeological stone assemblages provide evidence of
tool manufacturing stages and also activities in which the
tools were used. In this section we reconstruct generalised
reduction sequences for different periods along the Victorian coast. We also examine specific changes in the kinds
of stone tools being used and relate these to changes in
subsistence behaviour such as the range of resources used
and the tasks in which stone tools were used. An analysis
of the stone tools from GGl on Great Glennie Island, in
conjunction with other data, provides the basis for our
argument that there was no distinctively coastal flaked
stone toolkit in Victoria. Nevertheless, there have been
subtle changes in the exploitation of marine resources
during the Holocene and these can be related to the transportation of possessions and general changes in the mobility of the Aboriginal groups.
Flaked stone industries along the Victorian coast are
marked by a general absence of distinctive tool types with
two notable exceptions; the widespread distribution of
microlithic backed blades in the mid- to late Holocene and
the restricted occurrence of burin production in the
Gippsland Lakes (Hotchin 1982). Typological analyses of
southeastern Australian stone tool types suggest three
main phases of tool production, a pre-microiithic phase up
until about 4000-5000 years ago, the microlithic phase and
in some areas, a post microlithic beginning about 500 to
1000 years ago until the present. Implications of this
scheme are that the microlithic phase represents the
widespread adoption of a distinctive standardised tool,
namely backed blades which are associated with a widely
adopted subsistence strategy. This strategy is thought to
entail a lightweight hunting toolkit oriented towards
groups of people hunting medium to large macropods (e.g.
McBryde 1978; Kamminga 1980; Witter 1988). The post
microlithic phase, where it occurred, is interpreted as a
period when non-stone using tools such as bone, netting
and wood were increasingly more important than stone for
subsistence tasks (e.g. Mulvaney 1962; Fullagar 1982). A
second feature of Australian Holocene toolkits may be the
widespread adoption of special seed grinding stones and
other plant processing equipment (Kamminga 1978;
Lourandos 1980:268-9; Smith 1988).
Several researchers have proposed that changes in the
number of sites and the number of artefacts indicate
population changes in southeastern Australia during the
Holocene (e.g. Hughes and Lampert 1982). A major
difficulty has been to recognise and explain differences in
stone tool technology, other than to follow the traditional
model of stone tool typology which implies that particular
stone tool types are the most important indicators of
technological change.
A major and ongoing study of debitage types for different periods in southeastern Australia has been that of
Witter (1984, n.d.). D. Witter accepts a tripartite scheme
as suggested by stone tool typologists but defines the three
Australian Archaeology , Number 40,1995
periods in terms of climatic variability, settlement pattern,
trophic levels, socio-political organisation and distinctive
reduction strategies which were inferred from reconstruction of tool production and related debitage forms.
Witter tabulates particular components of lithic technology on a two by two contingency table: expedient and
curated versus function-specific and multi-functional.
Witter constructs another contingency table for subsistence
strategy; generalist and specialist versus systematic and
opportunistic. He hypothesises that the earliest period is
associated with a generalised and opportunistic subsistence, expedient and multi-functional technology and the
exploitation of very large territories. According to Witter,
the next period, corresponding to the microlithic phase, is
associated with specialised and opportunistic subsistence
focusing on a meat diet, expedient and function-specific
technology and the exploitation of smaller territories with
increased communication and co-operation between tribal
groups.
The most recent phase, Witter proposes, in the last one
or two thousand years, is marked by a change in trophic
levels to a greatly increased plant food diet and dependence on plants for various products. In general, the
subsistence strategy becomes generalist and systematic.
Further, he sees this as part of a shift towards increased
social complexity in terms of smaller, more sedentary
tribal areas and the expansion of trading networks. Stone
technology of this most recent phase is characteristically
more highly curated and multifunctional than the preceding microlith phase.
Although the technological categories are arbitrary and
relative, Witter's model provides the basis for generalised
hypotheses about stone technology which are not necessarily dependent on the presence of type artefacts. In the
following section, aspects of these hypotheses are examined by use-wear and residue analysis in terms of function
specificity, expedience and curation.
Case study: Great Glennie Island
Great Glennie Island was formed by rising sea levels
about 6000 years ago and lies about 7 km from Oberon
Point on Wilsons Promontory. The excavated site, GG l , is
in a small granite rockshelter a few metres above sea level
and close to the only protected beach on the island. The
excavation trench was 1 m X 1 m and five stratigraphically
distinct midden units were identified. Twelve dates from
the site have been published, and each unit has been dated
and depthlage curves constructed (Head et al. 1983:108).
Dates from the three most recent midden units do not seem
to be consistent with the stratigraphy, but since they
overlap at one standard deviation, it can be inferred that
these three midden units were deposited in rapid succession sometime during the last 400 years.
The aims of this excavation were to establish dates for
occupation, the nature of the occupation, seasonality, the
reasons for visitation and population numbers (Jones and
M e n 1985). A use-wear and residue analysis of all the
stone artefacts was completed by Fu llagar (1986; Fu llagar
et al. in press) who related stone tool functions to subsistence tasks.
Victorian Oflshore Islands in a Mainland Coastal Economy
There are more than 2.5 kg of bone from the site and
the fauna1 analysis indicates that seal and b i d are important in all five units (Jones and Allen 1985). However,
fish became important only in the upper unit which also
has by far the most shellfish. The earliest occupation is at
about 18Xk120 BP ANU 3832, but this represents a
fleeting visit and the lowest midden unit is thought to be
dated by a radiocarbon determination of 148Oi120 ANU
2429 (Head et al. 1983:107). The first stone artefacts are
found in unit 4, dated to about 107Oi90 BP (ANU 2427).
Most of the artefacts were made of flint but with some use
of quartz which becomes progressively less common. All
flint and perhaps the quartz artefacts as well, must have
been brought across to the island, since fresh nodules have
not been found on the beach (Scott-Virtue 198256).
Formal tool types are absent.
A reduction in the importance of quartz is a feature
noted by Coutts between Yanakie A and Yanakie B times
on the adjacent Wilsons Promontory mainland. The
Yanakie A phase is associated with a postulated post
glacial thermal maximum dating from about 3100 to 6500
years ago. The Yanakie B phase is associated with the
subsequent occupation to the ethnographic present. Some
time after 3100 BP backed blades are no longer found in
the toolkits.
Flint flake production has been categorised into four
reduction stages, identifiable according to the absence,
presence and distribution of the distinctive white cortex
(Fullagar 1986:241-4). Midden Unit 4 at GG1 has flakes
mostly from the later stages of reduction, in contrast to the
other units which have flakes from middle, initial or all
stages (Table 3). Unit 4 is also the only unit to have tools
with highly developed use-polish (Fig. 3). Thus the tools
in Unit 4 appear to have been lmapped away from the site,
presumably on the mainland, and a few tools have been
heavily used. In contrast to this technology, tools from
other units seem to have been manufactured from unworked blocks which had been transported in that form to
the island.
M i i Unit
1
2
3
4
5
Table 3
Radiocarbon Years BP*
390=/-75
2 7 W
320-J-l70
10 7 W
1w120
G&& lsland'excavatio", midden Unit 4. 1 D I V = 5 microns. Probably used to scrape reeds.
were brought across from the mainland. Analysis of the
stone tools in later occupation phases suggests that prepared tools were first brought to the island during accumulation of midden Unit 4. This is identified on the basis of
the degree of reduction, retouch and the polish, while the
use-wear and residue analysis suggest that about 30% of
these tools had two or more utilised edges and were
intensively used. Altogether a fairly organised use of the
island appears to have been envisaged by those individuals
who brought these tools. In contrast to this, in the final
phase of occupation, cores were transported to Great
Glennie and all phases of the reduction sequence are
represented in the tools. About 40% of the tools had two
or more utilised edges, there is little retouch or polish and
it seems reasonable to suggest this indicates that a more
opportunistic strategy was envisaged for the island.
Analysis of the stone artefacts demonstrates that there
are no distinctive tool types for exploiting the marine
environment. The imported island toolkit seems to change
from a curated technology with some flakes intensively
used for a single task to one which is more expedient, with
Curation of Tools
low
bw
bw
high
Reduction Stages
all
initial
middle
later
stone absent
Reduction stages and t d curation in the Great Glennie lsland sequence. (' Following Head et al. 1983).
There are also more resharpening flakes in Unit 4,
supporting the proposition of a higher intensity of use than
for the other Units (Fullagar l986:241-5 1).
Although there are retouched flakes and cores in
Units 1 and 4, none of these is in the form of a distinctive
tool type known to occur in other stone assemblages.
Despite the lack of formal variation, identification of the
reduction stages allows interpretation of the industry in
terms of movements of people along the mainland coast
whence the people came with their stone artefacts.
During the first phase of occupation, no stone tools
were left in the midden (Unit S), suggesting few or none
intensively used flakes. A similar study of stone artefact
technology and use has not been undertaken on the adjacent mainland and the sequence of technological changes
do not match precisely those hypothesised by Witter.
Nevertheless, descriptions by Coutts (1970:118-21) for
post-microlithic assemblages, 'Yanakie B', are consistent
with the latest phase of the Great Glennie sequence:
increased importance of cores which have a few flakes
detached and a little use-wear; quartz less important as a
raw material; absence of microliths: less complicated stone
tools. It is not possible to determine whether the nature of
lithic technology of midden Unit 4 is more similar irv the
Australian Arclmology. Number 40, 1995
Yanakie A or Yanakie B technology. Backed blades may
simply be absent on Great Glennie because they have
nothing to do with marine resources. However, technological changes identified on Great Glennie Island, seem
to reflect a change on the mainland to more expedient and
less sophisticated tools, as suggested by Coutts' analysis of
Yanakie A and Yanakie B sites.
Almost all of the 2.5 kg of bone from the Great Glennie excavation are from seabird, seal and fish, suggesting,
along with the shellfish, a marine and seabird diet.
Nevertheless, the evidence has been interpreted as 'single
visits for a few days by a small number of people' and as
'rare and short-term visits separated by substantial periods
of time' (Head et al. 1983:103). Thus the evidence from
Great Glennie suggests that marine resources were not
integral to Aboriginal subsistence at any stage in the last
2000 years.
Conclusion
The available evidence from the Victorian offshore
islands supports the hypothesis that the Aborigines of the
recent past were engaged in a coastal economy. Following
our earlier definition, it does not appear that there was a
marine economy in this area. Both the patterns that
emerge from the economic data and the technological data
support this contention, Although all the islands studied
in detail have their own particular characteristics, some
common features emerge which need further elaboration.
However, it is significant that the patterns of island exploitation along the Victorian coast differ markedly from the
development of Aboriginal coastal economies further north
on the New South Wales coast and to the south on the
Tasmanian coast. In this respect the Victorian evidence
cautions against models of regional and continental
cultural change (e.g. intensification) which do not account
for local resource use and settlement history.
In Victoria the littoral was never extensively exploited,
but rather the emphasis was on the swamps and open
forest of the coastal plains (Gaughwin 1983; Head 1987;
Lourandos 1980, 1985; Luebbers 1978). The evidence
suggests that many of the wetlands and swamps were
formed within the last six thousand years and therefore
this system of exploitation could only have begun after the
sea levels rose to near their modem heights. It is then of
some interest that the islands only appear to become
incorporated into mainland systems from around 2000
years ago. While Sullivan (1982) in New South Wales
and Vanderwal and Horton (1984) in Tasmania have both
argued that the later use of islands meant an improvement
in technology, notably canoes, we do not see this as a
recent development in technology as we suspect that
canoes have long been in use on rivers, lakes swamps and
estuaries and see no specific improvement in their design
which suggests adaptation to the open sea. Rather the
explanation appears to lie in another direction - changing
land use systems on the adjacent mainland. These systems
may have been quite different from those operating along
the New South Wales and Tasmanian coastlines.
The frequency of use of islands indicates that they did
not form an integral part of any economy. Avalability oi
A us! ralian Archaeology, Number 40. 1995
water was certainly not a problem on islands like Phillip,
Gabo and French, and it is unlikely that water avadability
on the coast generally was a factor limiting the development of a marine economy. Visits appear fleeting and
probably only involved small numbers of people. Thus the
expectation that the resources of the sea were an important
and regular component of the diet is not met. The activities that were undertaken nevertheless show a noticeable
orientation to the sea with meat resources appearing to
predominate. Of those meat resources shellfish appear as
a regular component, fish are well represented while seals
and birds are variable contributors to the diet.
This degree of fishing is not matched on mainland
coastal middens and requires further discussion. On
mainland midden sites non-human skeletal remains are
not uncommon (Coutts et al. 1991:Table 14), but fish
bones are rare (e.g. Godfrey 1989; Coutts 1970; Coutts
et al. 1981; Brennan 1987; Lourandos 1980) suggesting
that these sites represent a different sort of activity; that of
specialised shellfishing combined with a generalist strategy. The greater use of fish on offshore islands corresponds to the findings of Sullivan (1982) for the New
South Wales islands and suggests that the lure of better
fishing may have drawn people offshore. However it
appears a little strange that this activity, so poorly represented on the mainland should become relatively important offshore. Further work on the nature of fishing by a
careful analysis of the species of fish represented in the
sites and their likely methods of capture is needed to
clarify the importance of this activity in the overall economy. There are some avenues available from this study to
suggest how the fishing may reveal decisions taken onshore.
The identification of the reduction sequences on GGI
suggested a greater movement of people throughout their
territories over time, Whether this is related to a greater
mobility across territories or whether these were becoming
smaller through time remains a question of some interest.
It may be possible that as in New South Wales, there was
an increase in the numbers of people living on the coast
necessitating them to 'increase their ecological universe'.
However this suggestion does not seem to fit with the
fleeting and selective nature of the visits to the islands we
have studied. We feel, as others have argued, that a
greater concentration on plant food resources, particularly
wetlands, was associated with higher populations and
smaller territories. Such a development could have led to
a need to more effectively exploit the fewer meat resources
that would have been available within the diminished
territory. It is relatively difficult to increase the capacity to
capture more land animals. However the problem may
have been solved by incorporating the relatively meat-rich
offshore islands into the system. The model which appears to fit the data is that small hunting parties visited the
islands. These parties appear to have exploited a range of
resources with a concentration on shellfishing and fishing
with a relatively lesser exploitation of seals and seabirds.
Due to low amounts of plant food on these islands. there is
little reason to stay for long periods even though this was
possibie at ieast on Phillip Isilil~d. We believe that this
47
VictorianO#khoreIslands in a Mainland Coastal Economy
model of hunting expeditions could provide a plausible
explanation for our data.
At this stage no particular seasonal use of the islands
can be identified. The absence of muttonbirds in sites may
indicate late Autumn through to early Spring visits.
However it is also possible that these buds were not a
favoured food and, given the ready availability of other
foods, may not have been captured even in the summer
months. If these islands were an important part of any
economic system we would have expected to see the
abundant seasonal resources available there utilised to a
much greater extent by incorporating them into the strategy on a regular basis. If these visits were made in the
autumn and winter months the explanation must be sought
in a greater understanding of the mainland activities. Is it
possible that these months are those when terrestrial
resources are under stress periodically? The effects of
prolonged drought on the swamp and open plain resources
are poorly understood and it is tempting to speculate this
condition could initiate the kind of use of the islands that
we have identified.
Another tempting avenue of explanation is that alluded
to in the historical accounts; that these islands were
resorted to at times of social unrest, that they provided a
hideout when under attack from hostile tribes. In this
respect it is interesting that all appear close to tribal
boundaries and that these boundaries were known to be
disputed in the historic period (Gaughwin and Sullivan
1984; Coutts et al. 1984). This kind of visitation would
also lead to unseasonal visitation.
In conclusion, it has been demonstrated that the offshore islands of the Victorian coast were intermittently
visited but did not form an important part of the overall
subsistence strategy and land use activities of the Aborigines of the fecent past. The nature of their use raises a
number of propositions which further our understanding of
the nature of coastal economies in this area. We feel that
thevdueoflookingatheseislandsinaregional Perspecthe has been vindicated.
Acknowledgements
We ate greatly indebted to Jim Allen and Rhys Jones
for allowing us acxess to unpublished data from Great
Glennie Island, although the views expressed here are ours
alone. Catherine Usher (La Trobe University) and Martin
Goman (Museum of Victoria) identified the fish bones
from Gabo Island. We would like to thank the following
people who read drafts and assisted in the production of
figures: Jim Allen, Sue Feary, Rudy Frank, David Frankel,
Lesley Head, the late Jeny van Tets and Peter White. This
paper is a revised version of one we presented at the AAA
Conference at Point Walter, Western Australia in 1987.
References
Allen, J., Gosden, C., Jones, R. and White, J.P. 1988 Pleiste
cene dates for the human occupation of New Ireland,
northern Melanesia. Nufure 33l(6158):707-9.
Ancll, B. 1960 Hunting and Trapping Methods in Australia
Qnd Oceania. Uppsala: Studia Ethnographica Upsaliensia,
Almqvist and Wiksells.
Beaton, 1. 1985 Evidence for a coastal occupation time-lag at
Princess Charlotte Bay (north Queensland) and implications for coastal colonisation and population growth t h e e
ries for Aboriginal Australia. Archaeology in Oceania
20(1): 1-20.
Bowdler, S. 1977 Coastal colonization of Australia. In J. Allen,
J. Golson and R. Jones (eds) Sunda and Sahul: Prehistoric
Studies in Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia.
pp.206-46. London: Academic Press.
Brennan, G. 1987 Investigating the formation of shell deposits.
Unpublished B.A.(Hons) thesis, Department of Archaeology, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Coutts, P.J.F. 1970 The Archaeology of Wilsom Promoniory.
Canberra: Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies.
Coutts, P.J.F. 1981a Readings in Victorian Prehistory, VoL 2:
The Victorian Aboriginals 1800 to 1860. Victorian Archaeological Survey, Minishy for Conservation, Victoria.
Coutts, P.J.F. 1981b Coastal archaeology in Victoria Part 1:
The morphology of coastal sites. Proceedings of the Royal
Society of Victoria 92:67-80.
Coutts, P.J.F., Aplin, K. and Taylor, N. 1984 Archaeological
investigations at Captain Stevensons Point, Mallacoota. In
P.J.F. Coutts (ed.) Coastal Archaeology in South Eastern
Victoi.ia, pp.1-183. Melbourne: Ministry for Planning and
Environment. Records of the Victorian Archaeological
Survey 14.
Coutts, P.J.F., Witter, D.C., Cochrane, R.M. and Patrick, J.
1981 Sites of Scientific Interest in the Victorian Coastul
Region. A report prepared for the Town and Country
Planning Board, Melbourne, Victoria.
DeLumley, H. 1969 A Paleolithic camp at Nice. Scientific
American 220(5):42-50.
Dortch, C., Kendrick, G.W. and Morse, K. 1984 Aboriginal
mollusc exploitation in southwestern Australia. Archaeology in Oceunia 13:81-104.
Flinders, M. 1814 A Voyage to Terra Australia 1801 1802
1803. 2 Vols, Facsimile Edition, 1966. Adelaide: Libraries Board of South Australia.
Frankel, D., Gaughwin, D., Hall, R. and Bird, C. 1989 Coastal
archaeology in south Gippsland. Australian Archaeology
28: 14-25.
Fullagar, R. 1982 What's the use?: An analysis of Aire Shelter 11, Glenaire, Victoria. Unpublished M.A. (Prelim.)
thesis, Division of Prehistory, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Fullagar, R. 1984 An archaeological survey of the coast from
Cape Howe to Wingan Point, including G a b Island. In
P.J.F. Coutts (ed.) Coastal Archaeology in South Eastern
Australia, pp.223-57. Melbourne: Ministry for Planning
and Environment. Records of the Victorian Archaeological Survev
.' 14.
Fullagar, R. 1986 Use wear and residues on stone tools.
Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, La Trobe University. Melbourne.
Fullagar, R., Allen, J. and Jones, R. in press Residues or usewear? British Archaeological Reports.
Gaughwin, D. 1978 A bird in the sand: An investigation of
muttonbirds, other seabirds and waterfowl in recent prehistoric southeast Australia. Unpublished B.A.(Hons) thesis,
Department of Prehistory and Anthropology, The Australian National University, Canberra.
Gaughwin, D. 1983 Coastal economies and the Western Port
Catchment. Unpublished M.A. thesis, La Trobe University, Melbourne.
Gaughwin, D. 1984 Women in the food quest. The Artefact 9
(1-4):23-8.
-
Australian Archaeology, Number 40, 1995
15/5/95
Gaughwin, D. and Brennan, G. 1986 Stinker Bay shell midden.
Archaeology in Oceania 2 1( 1):63-8.
Gaughwin, D. and Sullivan, H. 1984 Aboriginal boundaries and
movement in Western Port. Victoria. Aboriginal History
8(1-2):80-98.
Gill, E.D. and West, A.L. 1971 The Aborigines and Lady Julia
Percy Island, Victoria. Victorian Naturalisr 88244-8.
Godfrey, M.C.S. 1989 Shell midden chronology in southweste m Victoria: Reflections of change in prehistoric population and subsistence. Archaeology in Oceania 24(2):65-9.
Grant, J. 1803 The Narrative of a Voyage of Discovery.
London: Roworth.
Hall, R. 1986 Site formation in coastal dunes. Unpublished
B.A.(Hons) thesis, Department of Archaeology, La Trobe
University, Melbourne.
Haydon, G.H. 1846 Five Years Experience in Australia Felix.
London: Hamilton Adarns.
Head, J., Jones, R. and Allen, J. 1983 Calculation of the 'marine
reservoir effect' from the dating of shell-charcoal paired
samples from an Aboriginal midden on Great Glennie
Island, Bass Strait. Australian Archaeology l 7 : W 112.
Head, L. 1983 Environment as artefact. A geographic perspective on the Holocene occupation of south-western Victoria.
Archaeology in Oceania 18:73-80.
Head, L. 1987 The Holocene prehistory of a coastal wetland
system: Discovery Bay, southeastern Australia. H u m
Ecology 15(4):435-62.
Head, L. 1988 Holocene vegetation, fire and environmental
history of the Discovery Bay region, south-westem Victoria. Australian Journal of Ecology l3:2 1-49.
Hotchin, K. 1982 The archaeology and changing environment of
Jack Smith Lake, southeastern Gippsland, Victoria. Unpublished B.A.(Hons) thesis. Departments of Prehistory
and Anthropology, and Geography, The Australian
National University, Canberra.
Howitt, A.W. n.d. Original manuscript, Museum of Victoria,
Melbourne.
Hughes, P.J. and Lampert. R.J. 1982 Prehistoric population
In
changes in southern coastal New South Wales.
S. Bowdler (ed.) Coastal Archaeology in Eastern Australia: Proceedings of the 1980 Valla Conference on Australian Prehistory, pp. 16-28. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian
National University. Occasional Papers in Prehistory.
No. 11.
Jones, R. 1976 Tasmania: Aquatic machines and offshore
islands. In G. de G. Sieveking, I.H. Longworth and
K.E. Wilson (eds) Problems in Economic and Social Archaeology, pp.235-63. London: Duckworth.
Jones, R. 1977 Man as an element of a continental fauna: The
case of the sundering of the Bassian bridge. In J. Allen,
J. Golson and R. Jones (eds) Sunda and Sahul: Prehistoric
Studies in Southeast Asia, Melanesia and Australia.
pp.3 17-86. London: Academic Press.
Jones. R. and Allen. J. 1979 A stratified archaeological site on
Great Glennie Island, Bass Strait. Ausrralian Archaeology
9:l-11.
Jones. R. and Allen. J. 1980 A radiocarbon date for the final
prehistoric occupation of Great Glennie Island Cave, Bass
Strait. Ausrralinn Archaeology 10:2 1-5.
Jones. R. and Allen. J. 1985 The Great Glennie Island excavation. llnpublished manuscript.
Kamminga, J. 1978 Journey in to the microcosms. A functional
study of certain classes of prehistoric Australian stone
tools Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of Sydney.
Sydney.
Ausfralian A rchueolog?..Number 40. 1995
Gaicghwin and Fullclgat
Kamrninga. J. 1980 A functional investigation of Australian
microliths. The Artefact 5(1-2): 1-18.
Lampert. R.J. 1981 The Great Kartitn Mystery. Canberra:
Department of Prehistory. Research School of Pacific
Studies. The Australian National University. Terra Australis 5.
Lourandos. H. 1980 Forces of change. Unpublished Ph.D.
thesis, University of Sydney, Sydney.
Lourandos. H. 1985 Intensification and Australian prehistory.
In T.D. Price and J. Brown (eds) Prehistoric HunterGatherers: The Emergence of Cultural Complexity,
pp.385-423. Florida: Academic Press.
Luebbers, R. 1978 Meals and menus: A study of change in
prehistoric coastal settlements in South Australia. Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, The Australian National University,
Canberra.
Mackaness, G. (ed.) 1941 George Augustus RobinsonS Journey
into Southeastern Australia 1944 wirh George Henry Haydon S Narrative of Part of rhe Same Journey. Sydney: Privately published by the editor. Australian Historical
Monographs XIX (new series).
Morse, K. 1988 Mandu Mandu Creek Rockshelter: Pleistocene
human occupation of North West Cape, Western Australia.
Archaeology in Oceania 23: 8 1-8.
McBryde, I. 1978 Backed blade industries from Graman Rock
Shelters, New South Wales: Some evidence on function. In
V.N. Misra and P. Bellwood (eds) Recent Advances in
Indo-Pacific Prehistory Proceedings of the International
Symposium held at Poona, December 19-21, pp.23 1-49.
Oxford and IBH, New Delhi.
McConnell. A. and Gunn. B. 1984 An archaeological survey of
Mallacoota Inlet, Top and Bottom Lakes. In P.J.F. Coutts
(ed.) Coastal Archaeology in South-Eastern Victoria,
pp.185-232. Melbourne: Ministry for Planning and Environment. Records of the Victorian Archaeological Survey 14.
Mulvaney, D.J. 1962 Archaeological excavations on the Aire
River, Otway Peninsula, Victoria. Proceedings of the
Royal Sociev of Victoria 72:53-85.
O'Connor, S. 1989 New Radiocarbon dates from Koolan Island,
West Kimberley, WA. Australian Archaeology 28:92- 104.
Scott-Virtue, L. 1982 Flint: The foundation for an hypothesis.
Unpublished B.A.(Hons) thesis, Division of Prehistory, La
Trobe University. Melbourne.
Smith, M.A. 1988 Central Australian seed grinding implements
and Pleistocene grindstones. In B. Meehan and R. Jones
(eds) Archaeology wirh Ethnography: An Australian Perspective, pp.94-108. Canberra: Department of Prehistory.
Research School of Pacific Studies, The Australian
National University. Occasional Papers in Prehistory,
No. 15.
Sullivan, H. 1981 An archaeological survey of the Mornington
Peninsula, Victoria. Victoria: Victoria Archaeological SurOccasional Reports
vey, Minis try for Conservation.
Series. No. 6.
Sullivan. M. E. 1982 Exploitation of offshore islands along the
New South Wales coastline. Ausrralian Archaeology 15:
8-10.
Thorn, B.G. and Chapell, J. 1975 Holocene sea-levels relative
to Australia. Search 6(3):00-3.
Thomas. W . 1983 Letter from William Thomas (undated). In
T.F. Bride (ed.) Lerrers from Vicroriun Pioneers, pp.397439. Melbourne: Currey O'Neil. New Edition.
Thomas. W. 1839-1850 Private papers. 16 vols and 8 boxes of
papers. journals. letterbooks. reports etc. Uncatalogued
manuscript Set 2 14. Item 27. Mitcheii Library. Sydney.
49
VictorianOfshore islands in a Mainland Coastal Economy
Tuckey, J.H. 1803 Memoir of a chart of Port Phillip surveyed in Witter, D.C. 1984 An archaeological survey of Apollo Bay and
the Otway Ranges. Melbourne: Victoria Archaeological
October 1803 by James Tuckey of His Majesty's Ship CalSurvey. Unpublished report.
cutta. Historical Records of Australia 3:100-22.
Witter,
D. 1988 From butchering caribou to butchering stone.
Vanderwal, R. and Horton, D. 1984 Coastal Southwest TasIn
B. Meehan and R. Jones (eds) Archaeology with Ethmania: The prehistory of Louisa Bay and MaatsuykPr
nography: An A ustralian Perspective, pp. 3 3 4 1. Canberra:
Island. Canberra: Department of Prehistory, Research
Department of Prehistory, Research School of Pacific
School of Pacific Studies, The Australian National UniStudies, The Australian National llniversity. Occasional
versity. Terra Australis 9.
Papers in Prehistory, No. 15.
Weaver, F. 1985 Goanna Bay shell midden. Unpublished B.A. Witter, D.C. n.d. A model for the cultural sequence of south(Hons) thesis, Department of Archaeology, La Trobe Unieastern Australia. Unpublished typescript. 28pp.
versity, Melbourne.
Zallar, S.A., Siow, K. and Coutts, P.J.F. 1979 Stabilisation of
Webb, R. 1972 Vegetation of granite outcrops with special
Coastal Archaeological Sites in Victoria: A Pilot Study.
reference to Wilson's Promontory. Unpublished M.Sc.
Victoria: Soil Conservation Authority and Victoria Archthesis, University of Melbourne, Melbourne.
aeological Survey, Ministry for Conservation.
-
Media coverage of an archaeological issue: Lessons from the press
release of initial radiocarbon dating results of a possible pre-Cook
European ship at Suffolk Park, northern New South Wales
W.E. Boyd
In late June 1993, details were released to the media,
initially to local newspapers but shortly followed by
releases to regional and national newspapers, radio and
television stations, of the fust, albeit scant, scientific
evidence regarding the possible European origin and early
age (p=-Cook) of a shipwreck lying under the coastal
sands at Suffolk Park, northern New South Wales. The
details were released by the author as the specialist mmmissioned by a group of interested local people to collect
information concerning wood identification of an artefact
and its radiocarbon dating. These data were considered
necessary following the circulation of a local story identifying this shipwreck with one included in Aboriginal
stories reputed to date from around the 17th to 18th
centuries. The release of these data was viewed by the
author as being premature, but was precipitated by the
desire of the local community, who had commissioned and
paid for the radiocarbon date, to release the data.
This media release was, unsurprisingly, well-received
by the Australian media, being covered locally, regionally
and overseas. Moreover, given both that the information that the remains of a ship of probable European origin
dating possibly from the 15th to 17th centuries AD are
present on the east coast of Australia, a region for which
there is no documented early European presence - is
historically-contentious and potentially very important,
and that the press prefers certainty to uncertainty (West
1990), the media coverage was surprisingly positive. The
ensuing coverage was notable in that there was bob little
attempt to sensationalise the issue, and a general willingCentre f
aCoastal Management, F d t y d Resource Science and Manage
ment, M
m Cross University, Lismcxe. NSW 2480, Australia.
50
ness to discuss relevant issues of history and archaeological methodology in some depth. In particular, most media
coverage contained discussion of the uncertainties %sociated with the evidence, notably those of radiocarbon dating
and association between date and event.
This apparent success lies within the context of recent
commentary on the press coverage that archaeology in
Australia receives (Colley 1992; Colley and Hook 1992;
Hook 1992). Colley and Hook comment, for example, on
the tendency of the press to focus on sensation and conflict
within archaeology, to use established stereotypical images
of archaeology and archaeologists, and to simplify issues.
Parallel issues have been identified in the North American
press (West 1990). If this is the case, there may be serious
implications regarding the popular understanding of
archaeology.
Given, therefore, the apparent success of media coverage of albeit a small amount of archeological information,
this paper describes the course of that media exposure, and
identifies key elements which may have contributed to the
media success.
Background: the archaeoiogical setting and
the scientific data
Although the thrust of this paper concerns the media
coverage of an archaeological story, it is important to
outline the scientific and historical clemils of the issue
(Boyd et al. 1993; Charter 1993; Nutley 1993). It is of
particular importance to record the areas of uncertainties
atcached to this research, since these form a significant
part of the popular media coverage of the issue. It should
be noted that more recently, the evidence which forms the
Australian Archaeology, Number 40, 1995