Bulletin of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology (2012), 36: 44–54
‘Part of the normal beach scenery’: shipwreck investigations at Port MacDonnell, South Australia Maddy Fowler1
Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, ADELAIDE, South Australia SA 5001 Email:
[email protected]
Jennifer McKinnon
Department of Archaeology, Flinders University, ADELAIDE, South Australia SA 5001 Email:
[email protected] 1 Author for correspondence Introduction The flotsam of the sea has a queer fascination to dwellers along the coasts. It has been gathered and used ever since the earliest times and folk were ever on the watch for the prizes the sea brought to their doors. It was found under the rocky headlands swirled high and dry upon shingle and ledges. The winter storms sweep it into inlets and creeks or piles it upon the masses of grey chert where some low point juts seaward. Houses and sheds were built of it. Furniture and fixtures, tables, and chairs that stand in old houses fashioned from the timbers of long forgotten wrecks (Perryman n.d.).
Archaeological research at Port MacDonnell, South Australia recently attempted to identify the remains of a wooden shipwreck seasonally exposed in the beach and other shipwreck timbers stored at the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum. The identity of the shipwreck in the beach has been a local mystery for many years, with several community members weighing in on which vessel they suspect the remains to represent. During two periods of fieldwork (March and July 2011), archaeological and geophysical surveys were conducted in order to determine the extent of the partially exposed beach shipwreck in an attempt to identify it historically. Oral history interviews were also conducted as part of this research to obtain additional information about the vessels, but also to answer broader questions about shipwrecks as places in the landscape and the impacts they had and continue to have on rural coastal communities and vice versa. This paper provides preliminary results of the field project researching shipwrecks in the Port MacDonnell community.
Figure 1. Port MacDonnell (Google Earth, 2011).
included the MacDonnell lighthouse, opened in 1859; three mooring buoys, laid in the bay around 1861 with two added later; and, a jetty, constructed in December 1860 and opened in April 1861 (Jenkin 1994: 55). A life-boat shed was added to the jetty in 1863, but was dismantled in 1957 (Jenkin 1994: 56). The Royal Life-Saving Service was formed in 1865 and was made ready to assist in shipwreck events (Jenkin 1994: 37). The first life-boat was Rescue in 1860, replaced by Percy in 1867, and finally Undaunted in 1908 that finished its service in 1930 (Port MacDonnell Tourist Association 2000). There was also a rocket crew who used a rocket apparatus to shoot a line between troubled ships and shore (Jenkin 1994: 37). According to customs revenue reports, in the 1870s Port MacDonnell became the second busiest port in South Australia, after Port Adelaide (Clark 1990: 8). But with all its successes there were also losses and tragedies, and many shipwrecks occurred along Port MacDonnell’s coastline. Ten shipwrecks are known to have wrecked in the general vicinity of the township (Table 1), all of
History of Port MacDonnell Port MacDonnell is a coastal town located in the southeast of South Australia (Fig. 1). The first people in the region were the Bunganditj Indigenous group (Jenkin 1994: 4). In 1800, Lieutenant James Grant, on board the brig Lady Nelson, was the first British explorer to visit this region of the South Australian coast and was responsible for the naming of local geographic features such as Mt. Schank, Mt. Gambier, Cape Northumberland and Cape Banks (Clark 1990: 5). Port MacDonnell, originally called MacDonnell Bay, was placed on the map in 1856; however it was not until April 1860 that it was officially proclaimed the southernmost port in South Australia (Jenkin 1994: 10). Maritime infrastructure in the area 44
FOWLER & MCKINNON: SHIPWRECK INVESTIGATIONS AT PORT MACDONNELL
Built- wrecked
Tonnage (ton)
Type
J. Lovett
1846–1852
137
Schooner
Maine, USA
Witness
1850–1853
132
Brigantine
Sunderland, England
Bandicoot
1838–1861
55
Schooner
Hobart, Tasmania
Adelaide
1831–1861
95
Brigantine
Macquarie Harbour, Tasmania
Miame
1848–1861
229
Brigantine
New Brunswick, Canada
Flinders
1863–1873
102
Schooner
Brisbane Water, NSW
Countess
1875–1876
83
Schooner
Brisbane Water, NSW
Galatea
1860–1876
167
Brigantine
Neurounebeck, Germany
St Marc
1864–1876
262
Barque
Nantes, France
Lotus
1874–1892
86
Ketch
Port Adelaide, SA
Name
Table 1.
Built location
List of shipwrecks in Port MacDonnell area (Clark 1990).
which contributed something to the building of the port through salvaged raw or finished materials or additional town members. During the early period of settlement, most people in the community were involved to some extent in maritime industry (Jenkin 1994: 26). Trade centred largely on agricultural exports and it was not until increased rail and road transport that maritime trade gradually declined (Clark 1990: 8). Today, the maritime facilities are actively used by fishing and recreational vessels and a thriving crayfish industry operates out of Port MacDonnell (Clark 1990: 8). Thus the community has a long history of maritime activities and livelihood.
council and taken to the council depot due to local souveniring (Clark 1990: 73, 97). Paul Clark tentatively identified the remains as belonging to the vessel Miame that wrecked in 1861. Though planned for conservation and reconstruction, funds to properly conserve them were not available (Crookes 1987). The timbers were subsequently transported to the museum where they are at present in the backyard (Raupp 2007: 10). Fieldwork As a result of a lack of information about the identity of shipwrecks in Port MacDonnell, a research project was developed as an Honours thesis topic. This project set out to examine the extent to which archaeological signatures of shipwrecks inform the impacts of shipwrecks, as processes and places, on rural communities and vice versa. The aims of the research were:
Previous investigations Previous investigations in this area are represented by the major archaeological and historical survey conducted by Paul Clark in 1986. Clark was hired by the State Heritage Branch to carry out the first regional survey of shipwrecks located in Commonwealth waters adjacent to the South Australian coast. He conducted extensive historical and archaeological research into the known shipwrecks in this area and his work is the foundation on which this research project was built (Clark 1990). This research project chose two sites for extensive investigation. The first site, the remains of a wooden vessel called Shipwreck X for project purposes, is located in the sandy intertidal zone of the beach south of the township of Port MacDonnell. In 2006 Flinders University staff and students conducted a brief inspection of the shipwreck including a mud map and photography. They identified several of the timbers including a stern-post, frames, ceiling and hull planking, treenails and a possible section of the ship’s stem. It was suggested that based on average frame size and overall size of the site, it was likely to be a small and lightly constructed vessel (Raupp 2007: 10). The second site consists of shipwreck timbers located in the backyard of the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum. In 1986, the remains of a shipwreck uncovered by winter storms were removed from the beach by the
• To identify the remains of the shipwreck on the beach at Port MacDonnell and the timbers located in the museum yard to determine if they are from the same shipwreck; • To define the concept of shipwrecks as events, processes and places; and • To better understand the myriad ways in which shipwrecks impact(ed) on historical and contemporary society and how historical and contemporary society impact(ed) on shipwrecks. This paper will focus on the first aim—identifying the remains of two shipwreck sites. To do this both historical and archaeological research was conducted. Primary and secondary sources were reviewed including secondary histories, newspaper articles, books on subjects such as shipbuilding and timber use, ships registers, photographs and maps. Archaeological research consisted of a Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) survey, magnetometer survey, timber samples, probe survey and archaeological mapping.
45
BULLETIN AUSTRALASIAN INSTITUTE FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY, 36
Figure 2. Shipwreck X in beach (Photo: J. McKinnon).
Site plan The Shipwreck X site is located on Woolwash Beach just southeast of Port MacDonnell (Fig. 2). Due to its location within the intertidal, archaeological investigations were limited to low tide periods. Unfortunately the lowest tides of the year correspond with summer months but the shipwreck only exposes in the winter months. In order to establish a mapping reference system, three datum points were emplaced on the site in an area of the surrounding dune considered far enough from the high tide mark. Differential Global Positioning Systems (DGPS) readings were taken on the datum points which were left in place with the hope that they will survive into the future. A site plan was completed using trilateration from the three datum points, and distances between timbers were taken to verify the measurements. DGPS positioning was also used to secure accurate positions on the stern-post (Feature 1) and stem (Feature 4). Exposed timbers were measured, sketched and photographed. This was done so that the estimated size of the vessel scantlings could be compared to historically documented measurements from wrecked vessels. Though attempts were made at excavation to record scantlings of key features, sea conditions and the high water table prevented this data from being collected. Nevertheless a site plan illustrating the exposed timber features was created and measurements and observations were made where possible.
Ground Penetrating Radar Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR) is not commonly utilised to search for or delineate shipwreck sites in beach environments (Bristow & Jol 2003: 1), but given the availability of the equipment and staff, a GPR survey was employed for comparison with results of magnetometry. A grid was established over the exposed sections of the shipwreck at 30 m east to west and 15 m north to south. Prior to commencing the GPR survey, as much seaweed as possible was removed from the grid area; unfortunately one large clump was unable to be removed thus producing a negative space in the survey results. A Ramac/Mala X3M GPR mounted on a hand-propelled cart was configured to antenna 250 megahertz (MHz), antenna separation 0.36 m, trace interval 0.021 m and sampling frequency 1076 MHz. The lower frequency antenna (250 MHz) was chosen to maximise depth of penetration, as past studies have found that the nature of the intertidal zone can attenuate the signal (Bristow & Jol 2003: 1). The survey was conducted every metre in an east-west direction with a total of 15 transects completed. The data was acquired using Ramac GroundVision software (version 1.4.5) and processed using ReflexW software. This consisted of a time cut to 80 nanoseconds, an energy decay filter, Butterworth bandpass filter of 72-385 MHz and a background remove filter. Radar transects were placed in a 3D cube and a plan view slice at approximately 0.5 m depth was made (I. Moffat 2011, pers. comm. 21 Oct.). 46
FOWLER & MCKINNON: SHIPWRECK INVESTIGATIONS AT PORT MACDONNELL
sheathing and pitch, and a proposed function for each timber. Four timber samples were taken from Timber 1 (frame treenail), Timber 13 (keel or keelson), Timber 15 (frame) and Timber 16 (hull planking). Landscape survey and interviews During times when the Shipwreck X site was inaccessible due to tides and weather, aspects of the maritime landscape of Port MacDonnell were recorded. Street names, holiday home names, and businesses with names related to shipwrecks were recorded, photographed and GPS points were taken of their locations. Other recorded features of the landscape included graves of shipwrecked people or people related to the maritime industry, as well as possible shipwreck anchors and cannons on display about the town. In addition to archaeological fieldwork, this project included oral interviews with locals to gauge attitudes and behaviours about shipwrecks and maritime heritage in the region. Ethics approval was sought from the Flinders University Social and Behavioural Research Ethics Committee to undertake the interviews. Oral history interviews were conducted at the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum. Though the interviews were advertised through the local school newsletter and fliers placed in public areas around town, most of the seven interviewees were targeted by museum volunteer staff and all had some maritime background or affiliation. A significant aspect of the interview involved investigating people’s behaviours and attitudes about shipwrecks. Each interviewee was asked the same set of questions to allow for systematic comparability of data. The same questions were asked about the two shipwrecks under investigation to allow for comparison between each shipwreck. Each interview was conducted using a voice recorder and took between 8 and 20 minutes to complete. Interviews were then transcribed and each interviewee was given a copy of the transcript prior to signing the consent for publication. While both of these data collection efforts are significant to the research questions of the larger project, particularly in regards to the community impacts of and on shipwrecks, the results of these will not be included in this paper.
Figure 3. Timbers of Miame at Port MacDonnell (Photo: J. McKinnon).
Magnetometery A magnetometer survey was also conducted on the same grid using a Geometrics G-856 proton precession magnetometer with data collected at 1 m line and 1 m station spacing. Data were collected in east/west transects and a total of 495 points were recorded. The data from the survey was downloaded and processed to remove erroneous points in Microsoft Excel, gridded using MagPick software and presented as a contour plot in MagMap. Probe survey A systematic probe survey was conducted to 50 cm in depth at 2 m intervals. Where a positive return occurred, a probe was placed 50 cm in each direction around the positive, and continued until a negative return occurred. Due to tides, the probe survey could only be conducted over half of the site. Results of the probe survey were digitized in Adobe Illustrator. Timber sampling As the shipwreck is protected under the Commonwealth Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976, permits were obtained from the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) to undertake timber sampling. During March and July, a total of fourteen roughly matchbox-sized timber samples were collected from Shipwreck X. The location of each sample was recorded and each timber was photographed before and after the sample was removed. Samples were catalogued and sent to Jugo Ilic, Wood Science Consultant at Know Your Wood, Melbourne, for identification using microscopic analysis of wood structure. A total of 17 timbers located in the backyard of the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum were also recorded and sampled (Fig. 3). Each timber photographed was labelled with removable labels and photographs from several angles. Details recorded included fastener types and their dimensions, length, moulded and sided dimensions of each timber, average fastener spacing, presence of copper
Results—shipwreck X Shipwreck X is a dynamic site that is subject to seasonal sand fluctuation (Fig. 4). Based on visits to the site and local knowledge, the winter season is when sands are scoured from the beach and the shipwreck is most likely to be exposed. The best months for viewing the exposed remains are June and July just after a storm. During 2011 the shipwreck site uncovered, however not as much as in previous years. Thus photographs taken by locals were important in identifying key features that were not exposed in 2011. Over the course of the project much anecdotal evidence suggested that locals visit the shipwreck and have cut or removed sections of timber for use in making 47
BULLETIN AUSTRALASIAN INSTITUTE FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY, 36
Figure 6. Feature 2 (Photo: J. McKinnon).
Figure 4. Site plan of shipwreck X.
Figure 7. Feature 3 (Photo: Lionel Carrison, date unknown).
there is likely very little in the way of cultural material or artefacts left on the shipwreck, with the exception of the wooden structure itself. It is most likely that when exposed, artefacts were recovered by locals, as there is a history of ‘wrecking’ in the region from the historic period to the present. Features Feature 1 is a group of four timbers and is located at the north-western edge of the site (Fig. 5). This section is thought be the stern assembly; Timbers 1 and 2 may be the rudder post and stern-post respectively while the remainder of the timbers are likely deadwood or portions of the counter stern assembly: • Rudder post; • Stern-post; and • Deadwood or counter stern assembly. Feature 2 is a group of four timbers that have been interpreted as frames and are in a line along the western extreme of the site (Fig. 6). These frames curve upwards at
Figure 5. Feature 1 (Photo: J. McKinnon).
souvenirs or keepsakes. Without being able to see the site in its entirety, it is difficult to determine how much cultural impact this site may have been subjected to over the years. In addition, due to the seasonal exposure 48
FOWLER & MCKINNON: SHIPWRECK INVESTIGATIONS AT PORT MACDONNELL
Figure 8. Shipwreck X, Feature 3 (Photo: J. McKinnon).
Figure 10. Magnetometer survey results.
a local private collection were examined. This examination revealed that the treenails were used in conjunction with a triangular wooden plug. The plug would have been inserted into the head of the treenail after it was driven into the wood to create a watertight fit below the waterline. The potential to detect ferrous materials using the magnetometer was considered high based on the metal fasteners present, and the results of the survey revealed three distinct anomalies that align with known timber features above and below the surface of the sand (Fig. 10). Unfortunately, the GPR data was less revealing or perhaps more evasive. Upon consultation with a specialist, it appears that the saltwater did attenuate the signal. While it was not expected that the GPR would produce significant results, the survey did reveal that GPR may not be the
Figure 9. Feature 4 (Photo: Lionel Carrison, date unknown).
a concave angle towards the east and, given their position, are likely from the original structure. • Frames. Feature 3 is a group of four frames at the southern edge of the site (Fig. 7). These timbers curve upwards at a concave angle towards the south. Although not as exposed during 2011, photographs from locals provide evidence that these frames are the tips of a substantial amount of structure hidden below the surface of the sand (Fig. 8). This area includes a large section of nearly intact hull planking, frames and ceiling planking. Feature 4 is a single timber and has been identified as the stem (Fig. 9). It is no longer upright and is lying flat on its port side in an east-west direction at the eastern edge of the site. Photographs from locals have revealed that a substantial portion of the port side of the bow is still intact below the sediment. Due to the fact that the site was nearly covered with sand, little information could be gathered regarding the specifics of construction such as fastener patterns. Nevertheless, the small bits of timber exposed indicated the ship was fastened with wooden treenails, iron and copper-alloy fasteners. Careful examination of the photographs taken by locals reveals that the frames included in Feature 3 were fastened using wooden treenails. A few treenails taken from the site and located in
Figure 11. Probe survey results.
49
BULLETIN AUSTRALASIAN INSTITUTE FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY, 36 Feature #/Timber #
Common name
Scientific name
Possible location/function
Grey/white box or ironbark (box or box group) Grey or white box (box group eucalypt)
Eucalyptus ? moluccana or Eucalyptus ? paniculata
Stern
Eucalyptus ? microcarpa
Stern
F1/T3
Southern mahogany or Scribbly gum (gum group)
Eucalyptus ? botryoides, (or Eucalyptus haemastoma )
Planking
F1/T4
Red gum group
Eucalyptus ? camaldulensis
Planking
F2/F1
Blackbutt
Eucalyptus ? pilularis
Frames
F2/T2
Yellow/white stringybark
Eucalyptus ? muelleriana
Frames
F2/F3
Yellow/white stringybark
Eucalyptus ? muelleriana
Frames
F2/T5
Yellow/white stringybark
Eucalyptus ? muelleriana
Frames
F3/T1
White oak group (True oak)
Quercus sp.
Frames
F3/T2
White oak group (true oak)
Quercus sp.
Frames
F3/T3
White oak group (true oak)
Quercus sp.
Frames
F3/T4
White oak group (true oak)
Quercus sp.
Frames
F4/T1
Grey or white box (box group eucalypt)
Eucalyptus ?microcarpa
Stem
F1/T1 F1/T2
Table 2.
Shipwreck X timber identification results.
best geophysical tool in the toolbox for foreshore sites (I. Moffat 2011, pers. comm., 21 Oct.). The best instrument to determine what lay beneath the surface was the probe. A considerable amount of structure is still buried within 0–50 cm of sediment and possibly deeper. Unfortunately, only half the site was surveyed by probe due to tides. Nevertheless, the probe survey aligns with existing timbers above the sand and with the anomalies detected in the magnetometer survey (Fig. 11). Shipwreck X is quite a disarticulated site which could be a result of one of several processes, or a combination of many. Firstly, disarticulation could have occurred during the wrecking event. For example, one of the possible shipwreck candidates, the wreck of Adelaide, was described as breaking its back (Anon 1861b: 2). Secondly, it could be the result of post-depositional site formation processes. For example, it has been recorded that when the timbers located now at the museum were removed from the beach, heavy machinery was used and it might have also been used on this site. If the equipment was in the area and they were already removing shipwrecks, the Shipwreck X site might also have been subjected to intentional or inadvertent dismantling or levelling. Alternatively, Shipwreck X could represent the remains of more than one vessel, as several vessels are recorded occurring nearby to one another (such as Bandicoot and J. Lovett). Finally, the wreck being located in the beach, might have been subjected to contemporary salvage activities. Answers to questions such as these may only be answered with full-scale excavation in the future.
built (Table 2 and 3). Nearly all the Australian timbers identified are from species located in the coast or coastal hinterland from Victoria north to southern Queensland (Baker 1919). This is with the exception of inland grey box, which can be found in pockets in South Australia, and red gum, which can be found along all mainland waterways (Baker 1919). Nearly all wood species have properties of fine texture and interlocked grain and are strong, hard and durable. While some of the species have been cited as being used regularly for shipbuilding, all are used for other types of heavy construction such as jetties and structures (Baker 1919). White oak, on the other hand, contradicts the otherwise consistent results as it is found in the northern hemisphere and is not an Australian species. This could represent repairs made to the ship, or it could be that the frames of Feature 3 do not belong to the Shipwreck X vessel, but instead belong to one of the other vessels which wrecked along this stretch of beach. The scantling measurements from the stern-post were used to calculate the estimated length of the vessel. According to Marquardt (2003: 218), this measurement can be used to determine the length of the ship at the waterline. Based on the scantling dimensions, it is likely that the vessel was approximately 20 metres in length (Marquardt 2003: 218). When this project began, archaeological and historical records were reviewed for a list of possible shipwrecks in the area. A list of ten shipwrecks known to have wrecked in the vicinity were considered as possible candidates for Shipwreck X (Table 1). Of these ten, Galatea, St Marc, Miame, J. Lovett and Witness are least likely to be Shipwreck X as they were constructed overseas, which contradicts the results of the timber sample analysis. This is not to rule out that these ships could not have been significantly
Timber samples, scantling measurements and wrecking events Nine of the 13 timber samples identified from Shipwreck X were from Australian wood species; thus based on the results, the shipwreck is suspected to be Australian50
FOWLER & MCKINNON: SHIPWRECK INVESTIGATIONS AT PORT MACDONNELL
Scientific Name
Eucalyptus ?moluccana
Eucalyptus ?microcarpa
Eucalyptus ?paniculata
Common Name
Grey box
Inland grey box,
Grey ironbark
Fine texture, interlocked grain, very hard, strong, very durable.
Fine texture, interlocked grain, hard, strong, extremely durable.
Fine texture, interlocked grain, very hard, very strong, very durable, tough.
Closely related to and in westerly parts grades into inland grey box; found with grey ironbark.
Closely related to Grows with and grades into blackbutt and grey box to the stringybark. east, associated with river red gum.
Blackbutt.
1170 Central and northern coastal New South Wales, coast and coastal hinterland south-eastern Queensland north to Mackay. Heavy engineering construction, wharves, bridges, shipbuilding, poles, posts, housing, crossarms, railway sleepers, general outdoor use; in district of occurrence.
1170 Wheat belt of Victoria, New South Wales and Queensland, Flinders Ranges and Adelaide hills of South Australia.
1210 Endemic to coastal and sub coastal New South Wales from Bega to Coffs Harbour.
Fencing material and railway sleepers; in district of occurrence.
Heavy engineering construction, poles, railway sleepers, crossarms, heavy duty flooring, decking and shipbuilding, particularly keelsons, rudder posts and keels; Relatively common in coastal New South Wales and southern Queensland.
Properties
Associated species
Green density kg/m³
Geographic Range
Use
Table 3.
Eucalyptus ?botryoides
Eucalyptus haemastoma
Eucalyptus ?camaldulensis
Scribbly gum
Red gum group
Texture moderately coarse, interlocked grain.
Fine texture, interlocked and wavy grain, hard, durable.
1180 East coast narrow belt from Bairnsdale, Victoria to Port Stephens, New South Wales.
1150 Coast Batemans Bay, New South Wales to Maryborough, Queensland.
1130 Adjacent to most inland rivers of mainland Australia.
General structural purposes, flooring and panelling; relatively common on south coast of New South Wales.
Seldom milled, good fuel.
Heavy construction, railway sleepers, fine furniture, flooring, framing, fencing, turnery, panelling, posts; Used mainly in Victoria and south-west New South Wales.
Southern mahogany Medium texture, interlocked grain, slow drying, durable.
Timber results with properties and distribution (Bootle 2005; Boland et al. 2006; Baker 1919).
refitted, repaired or overhauled using Australian timbers; however, it is less likely. As such, the remains are more likely to be those of Lotus, Countess, Flinders, Adelaide or Bandicoot (Table 4). While Lotus is Australian built, it is an unlikely candidate for the shipwreck as it is recorded as having wrecked 200 yards offshore and east of Cress Creek which is further east of the Shipwreck X location (Anon 1892: 4). Countess and Flinders were both built in New South Wales. However, both are recorded as being constructed of different species of timber to those identified in the shipwreck samples (Dundon 1997: 186; Anon, 1873: 2). This is not to rule out that the species mentioned in the records are not just a portion of those used, or that repairs might have been made with timbers of different species. Nevertheless, Flinders is recorded as wrecking near Cress Creek, and Countess at Cress Creek (Barratt 1873: 5; Anon 1960: 72), which is approximately 1 km east of the Shipwreck X site, making these two ships less likely candidates. Adelaide and Bandicoot were both built in Tasmania (Clark 1990; Nash 2001), and Bandicoot is anecdotallyknown to have been built of a Tasmanian timber,
specifically peppermint. Evidence of Tasmanian-built vessels being constructed out of mainland timbers is known (Bullers 2006: 19; O’Reilly 2007: 4; Department of Environment and Planning, 1987: 33, 34). Based on the scantling dimensions of the stern-post of Shipwreck X, it is estimated that the vessel was approximately 20 m in length. The two vessels closest to this length are Adelaide at 19.81 m and Countess at 22.25 m (Clark 1990). Historical data relating to the wrecking location provides further evidence; Bandicoot is recorded as having wrecked near the location where J. Lovett came to grief (Anon 1861b: 2), whereas Adelaide is reported as coming ashore three miles south east of the township. The record of the wrecking of Adelaide, breaking its back, is most consistent with the site formation of Shipwreck X. One historical report claims the vessel apparently dragged three of its anchors before ending up on the beach (Anon 1861c: 2). While this study has revealed that it is not possible at this date to positively identify Shipwreck X, the most likely fit is Adelaide due to its size, timber species identification, location of wrecking and details of the wrecking event. 51
BULLETIN AUSTRALASIAN INSTITUTE FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY, 36 Ship Name
Bandicoot
Adelaide
Single-decked two- Single-decked twomasted schooner masted brigantine
Rig/Type Tonnage
0
Countess
Lotus
Single-decked Single-decked Single-decked two-masted schooner two-masted schooner two-masted ketch
55
95
102
83
86.3
Length
15.54 m
19.81 m
26.27 m
22.25 m
24.17 m
Breadth
4.45 m
5.7 m
6.31 m
5.79 m
7.1 m
Depth
2.96 m
3.14 m
2.8 m
2.32 m
2.32 m
Builder
John Watson
David Hoy
James Cox
E. Davis
John Lowen
Place Built
Construction
Government Brisbane Water, Shipyard, Macquarie Brisbane Water, NSW NSW Harbour, Tasmania Wooden, carvel Wooden frame Wooden, carvel built, Wooden, carvel built, square stern, plank, carvel built, elliptic stern, female built, elliptic standing bowsprit, square stern, scroll bust figurehead, hull stern, female bust scroll figurehead figurehead of Clarence River figurehead cedar and knee joints of honeysuckle
Hobart, Tasmania
Date constructed Date lost
Port Adelaide Wooden framed, carvel built, round stern
1838
1831
1863
1875
1874
19 April 1861
18 April 1861
29 June 1873
16 August 1876
23 June 1892
Location lost
Near wreck of J. Lovett 38°03'13"S 140°43'23"E
3 miles south-east of township
Near Cress Creek
Opposite Cress Creek
East of Cress Creek
Owner
E. French and Jas. Hay?
Benjamin Munson
SA Government
Philip Santo
Messrs T.E and W. Russell
Cargo
potatoes
potatoes
Table 4.
List of suspected shipwrecks (Clarke 1990; Nash 2001).
Sample Number
Feature
Common Name
Scientific Name
Sample 1
Treenail
Spruce
Picea sp.
Sample 2
Frame
Larch
Larix sp.
Sample 3
Keel/Keelson
Spruce
Picea sp.
Sample 4
Hull planking
Spruce
Picea sp.
Table 5.
Museum timber identification results.
Results—Museum Shipwreck A total of 17 timbers were recorded at the museum shipwreck timber pile, however there were more timbers buried in the pile that were inaccessible and unable to be recorded. Of those recorded they include: seven frames or parts of frame, five pieces of hull planking, two capstan or winch pieces, two keel/keelson/stringers and one knee. The timbers are heavily eroded, cracked and distorted due to their exposed location. Fasteners included wooden treenails, some of which were wedged, copper alloy fasteners and iron bolts. Some of the planking also had sheathing tacks, copper sheathing and black resin on their exterior. One frame also had a copper alloy pin with rope still wrapped around it. Evidence was found of the removal of bolts that appeared to have been sawn out. The presence of saw marks where fasteners were originally located fits with the local accounts that reported that the
vessel Miame was removed from the beach because locals were taking fasteners and pieces of timber as souvenirs or for scrap. The positive identification of the remains of the vessel located at the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum was much easier than that for Shipwreck X. Results of the four timbers identified from the museum shipwreck are as follows (Table 5). Tamarack is a type of larch, Larix laricina, also called hackmatack and is found throughout Labrador, Newfoundland, Quebec, the Maritime Providences of Canada and Ontario (Peattie 1948: 33). Peattie (1948: 34, 35) discusses its use for ship’s knees, as it is solid, durable and naturally angled for knees, stringers, keels and floors of small boats. White spruce is found from Newfoundland and Labrador to Alaska; black spruce also from Newfoundland to Labrador, Mackenzie and Alaska; 52
FOWLER & MCKINNON: SHIPWRECK INVESTIGATIONS AT PORT MACDONNELL
and red spruce from Nova Scotia to Southern Quebec (Peattie 1948: 45, 48, 50). This data suggests that the vessel was constructed in eastern North America, although the possibility of timbers being transported from North America to other places in the world cannot be ruled out. The museum shipwreck is very likely the remains of the shipwreck Miame based on the North American timber samples and local conversations about its original location. Miame was a 229-ton, 27.8-m long brigantine built in St John, New Brunswick, Canada in 1848 (Clark 1990: 73). Miame wrecked on 24 May 1861 after breaking from anchorage during heavy weather. The impact with the reef broke its back and it ended up near the remains of Bandicoot (Anon 1960: 64). The remains along with rigging, 500 bags of flour and 150 bags of wheat were sold to Mr Thos. Must for £651 1s 6d (Anon 1861a: 2). Miame was a wooden vessel described as being constructed of birch, hackmatack and pine with iron fastenings (Clark 1990: 73). Perryman (n.d.) relates that several weeks after the wreck a group of boys lit a fire inside the hold of Miame, cooked potatoes in the ashes and enjoyed themselves scrambling over the wreckage. The wreck caught fire that night and it was ablaze from stem to stern, and the vessel was reduced to a burnt out shell (Perryman, n.d.). The boys faced no repercussions as one of them was the son of an owner of the firm who bought the wreck (Perryman n.d.). Perryman (n.d.) describes that the remains still projected from the sand and it was possible to drive a vehicle through it. Interestingly enough, burnt areas were recorded on the pile of timbers at the museum, further substantiating the identification as Miame.
in the landscape that were associated with shipwrecks were investigated as well as oral interviews conducted with the community. The oral history interviews conducted in Port MacDonnell indicate that the community is concerned with its maritime heritage and management, that they want to know their maritime history and that they feel a sense of ownership of the shipwrecks. For example, one interviewee stated: …that type of history should be collected and be put into museums because...I can see...shipwrecks of age fast deteriorating and that history is not going to be there in the long term future;
and, another: I’d rather see it removed and preserved... if it was left in the sea nobody would know what it was or where it was, it’d just be another mystery you know.
Further, the idea of a shipwreck as a place in the landscape has been realised. One community member stated: Because they’ve always been there, it’s always just been part of the beach and part of the district. It’s not like it all of a sudden appears. I mean we’ve all known they’re there and we’ve seen them, and we sort of don’t take a lot of notice of them. I mean...people that haven’t seen them before would be...surprised or be of interest...it’s of interest to us as well but, we sort of take it as part of the normal beach scenery.
Conclusion One of the aims of the larger project presented above was to record and identify the remains of Shipwreck X and the shipwreck timbers at the museum in order to address questions related to community impacts on shipwrecks and vice versa. Through recording the sites it was revealed how shipwrecks affected the rural community of Port MacDonnell and how the community impacted these shipwrecks over time. While this paper did not go into detail about aspects of this subject, it did present some examples of how Port MacDonnell has interacted with its contemporary and now historic shipwrecks. For instance, examining the remains of the museum shipwreck revealed physical evidence of salvage such as the removal of bolts. This is indicative of community behaviour through either reuse or souveniring but also reveals the likelihood of objects or other parts of the wreck being in existence elsewhere. Nearly all of the shipwrecks within the vicinity of Port MacDonnell have some record of salvage or removal of objects after their wrecking. Further, if the identity of a shipwreck is known, it becomes possible to make direct connections between the wreck and places in the landscape. For example, the wreck of Miame has direct connections with places in the landscape such as Miami Street and a house named Miami (both misspellings of the shipwreck name). However, as the identification of the wrecks was not guaranteed, all maritime-related sites
This project is but one small contribution towards identifying Port MacDonnell’s maritime history and heritage. Acknowledgements The authors would like to thank the residents of Port MacDonnell for sharing with us their maritime history and heritage, particularly Carl and Gary von Stanke, Bev and Bruce Perryman, Veronica Jenkin and Kevin Hodges of the Port MacDonnell Maritime Museum and all the museum volunteers. We would also like to thank Amer Khan and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources for assistance with permits and field work, Ian Moffat for his professional assistance, Jason Raupp for his editorial assistance, and the March and July fieldwork teams. References
Anon, 1861a, Miscellaneous. The South Australian Register, 8 June, p.2. Anon, 1861b, The gale on the coast. The South Australian Register, 20 April, p.2. Anon, 1861c, MacDonnell Bay. The South Australian Advertiser, 26 April, p.2. Anon, 1873, The schooner “Flinders”. The Border Watch, 5 July, p.2. Anon, 1892, Wreck of the ketch Lotus. The South Australian Register, 24 June, p.4.
53
BULLETIN AUSTRALASIAN INSTITUTE FOR MARITIME ARCHAEOLOGY, 36 Anon, 1960, Port MacDonnell Centenary Celebrations, April 16th, 17th, 18th, 1960: souvenir brochure. Border Watch Office, Mount Gambier. Baker, R.T., 1919, The hardwoods of Australia and their economics. The Government of the State of New South Wales, Sydney. Barratt, A.F., 1873, Wreck of the Flinders. The South Australian Register 30 June, p.5. Boland, D.J., Brooker, M.I.H., Chippendale, G.M. and McDonald, M.W., 2006, Forest trees of Australia, fifth edition. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood. Bootle, K.R., 2005, Wood in Australia: Types, properties and uses, second edition. McGraw-Hill Australia, North Ryde. Bristow, C.S. and Jol, H.M. (eds.), 2003, Ground Penetrating Radar in sediments. Geological Society Special Publication 211. The Geological Society, Bath. Bullers, R., 2006, Quality assured: Shipbuilding in Colonial South Australia and Tasmania. Maritime Archaeology Monograph Series, No. 8. Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Clark, P., 1990, Shipwreck sites in the South-East of South Australia 1838-1915. Australian Institute of Maritime Archaeology Special Publication No. 5. South Australian Maritime Archaeology Series No. 1, Department of Environment and Planning, Fremantle. Crookes, P., 1987, Ship’s timbers identified: Maritime museum plan for Port MacDonnell. The Advertiser, 20 February. Department of Environment and Planning, 1987, The Water Witch wrecksite: A report on the identification, survey and partial recovery of the wrecksite. State Heritage Branch, Adelaide. Dundon, G., 1997, The shipbuilders of Brisbane Water, New South Wales. Self published, East Gosford. Jenkin, V., 1994, Port MacDonnell and District. Self published: Allendale East. Marquardt, K.H., 2003, The global schooner: Origins, development, design and construction 1695–1845. Naval Institute Press, Annapolis. Nash, M., 2001, Convict shipbuilding and the Port Arthur dockyard. Report for Port Arthur Historic Site Management Authority, Port Arthur. O’Reilly, R., 2007, Australian built wooden sailing vessels of the South Australian intrastate trade. Maritime Archaeology Monograph Series, No. 5. Shannon Research Press, Adelaide. Peattie, D.C., 1948, A natural history of trees of Eastern and Central North America. Massachusetts, Houghton Mifflin Harcourt. Perryman, C.E., n.d., Unpublished document. Received from Bev Perryman, Port MacDonnell. Port MacDonnell Tourist Association, 2000, Calendar: A glimpse of the past: Port MacDonnell & Districts. Gambier Print, Mount Gambier. Raupp, J., 2007, Southeast coast shipwreck inspection. Newsletter of the Australasian Institute for Maritime Archaeology 26.2: 10–11.
54
