Forest Street Archaeology Exhibition Post Office Gallery ... · Forest Street Archaeology...

ForestStreetArchaeologyExhibitionPostOfficeGallery,Bendigo

DirectedStudybyHelenCroninFlindersUniversity(StudentID2082160)December2011Supervisor:DrHeatherBurke

Acknowledgments IwouldliketothankAnne‐LouiseMuir,CuratorialOfficerHeritageVictoria,andDavidBannear,ArchaeologistHeritageVictoria,fortheirassistancewiththisdirectedstudy.Theywerebothextraordinarilygenerouswiththeirtimeandexpertise.IwouldalsoliketothankMaureen,whoquestionseverything.

ARCH8404HCronin(StudentID2082160)–DirectedStudyReport,ForestStreetexhibition‐i

Contents

1 Introduction ...................................................................................................................... 11.1 DesignoftheDirectedStudy ................................................................................... 11.2 Originalresearchquestions ..................................................................................... 2

2 Literaturereview............................................................................................................... 33 Methodology..................................................................................................................... 7

3.1 Museumvisits .......................................................................................................... 73.2 Artefactanalysis....................................................................................................... 73.3 ConsultationswithHeritageVictoriapersonnel ...................................................... 73.4 Literaturereview ..................................................................................................... 83.5 Historicalresearch ................................................................................................... 8

4 Exegesisonwritingthecatalogueessay ........................................................................... 94.1 Aimsoftheessay ..................................................................................................... 94.2 Challenges................................................................................................................ 94.3 Theinterpretiveprocess ........................................................................................ 104.4 Broadeningthecontext ......................................................................................... 114.5 Tellingthestory ..................................................................................................... 11

5 Catalogueessay .............................................................................................................. 136 Conclusions ..................................................................................................................... 247 References ...................................................................................................................... 26

7.1 Literaturereview ................................................................................................... 267.2 Exegesisonwritingthecatalogueessay................................................................ 277.3 Catalogueessay ..................................................................................................... 28

8 Appendix ......................................................................................................................... 30

ARCH8404HCronin(StudentID2082160)–DirectedStudyReport,ForestStreetexhibition‐Page1

1 Introduction Foraroundfiveweeksin2009,everylunchtimeIwalkedpastanexcavationgoingonjustdowntheroadfromwhereIworked.Istoodononesideofthecyclonewirefencewatchingthearchaeologistsworkingdiligentlyontheotherside.ForestStreetinBendigoturnedouttobeof"considerablesignificance"tobothBendigoandthestateaccordingtotheconsultingarchaeologists’report(SterenbergandFord2011:135).Oncompletionoftheexcavation,alltheartefactswerepackedupanddisappearedintotheHeritageVictoriawarehouseinMelbourne,andthedeveloperconstructedanewcommercialbuildingonthesite.In2010ImetHeritageVictoriaarchaeologist,DavidBannear,whoisbasedinBendigoandhadbeeninvolvedwiththeproject.Heisapassionateadvocateforgettinglocalstoriestoldlocallyandhisenthusiasmisinfectious.Whenthenewbuildingopenedearlierthisyear,thelocalnewspaperpublishedasupplementthatincludedaspreadaboutthe"treasures"thathadbeenunearthed.Iwrotetothepapersuggestingthatitwasashamethestorywasn'tbeingtoldhereinBendigo.LessthantwoweekslateranitemappearedinthesamenewspaperdetailingDavid’scallforahomefortheartefacts.BendigodoesnothaveadedicatedEuropeanhistorymuseum(asubjectofsomeinterestingdebatehere),butitdoeshavethePostOfficeGallery‐asatellitespaceoftheBendigoArtGallery‐thathoststemporarysocialhistoryexhibitions.ShortlyafterIwrotetothepaperandDavid’scallwaspublished,theArtGalleryannouncedthatitwasplanninganexhibitionofarchaeologyfromtheForestStreetsite.IcontactedthecuratorofthePostOfficeGallery,SandraBruce,andbeggedtobeinvolvedsomehow.

1.1 Design of the Directed Study Thecuratorsuggestedaninternship,whichwouldinvolvebackgroundresearchandwritinglabelsfortheartefactstobedisplayed.ForthepurposeofthisDirectedStudy,thelabeltextIproducedwastobesetinatheoreticalcontext.Thecurator,withtheassistanceofDavidBannear,woulddesigntheexhibitionandchoosetheartefacts.Sandrausuallywritesthecatalogueessaysthataccompanyeachexhibition.However,asshefeltarchaeologywasoutsideherfieldofexpertise,shehadaskedDavidtowritetheessay.Asmyresearchprogressed,IfeltaudaciousenoughtodraftthecatalogueessayandsubmitittoDavidBannearforcomment.ThefirstdraftwasverywellreceivedbyDavid,hiscolleaguesatHeritageVictoriaandSandra.WithadditionalcontributionsfromDavid,theessayhasbeenadoptedforuseasthecatalogueessay.Whilemyoriginalresearchquestionsandmethodologyweredesignedwiththepreparationoflabeltextinmind,theyhaveinformedthedraftingofthecatalogueessay.


1.2 Original research questions Theoriginalaimoftheprojectwastocreatelabeltextinformedby"bestpractice"andcurrenttheoreticalapproachestomuseumarchaeology.Themainresearchquestionguidingmystudywas:

• Inamuseumexhibit,howdoyouconveyasenseofthelimitationsofarchaeologicalevidence,andtheprocessandrealityofinterpretationtovisitors,whileatthesametimecreatinganengagingandsatisfyingexperience?

Subsidiaryquestionsincluded:

• Does"curatorialauthority"orconveyingdominantmeaningsfromarchaeologicalevidencematter?Ifsowhy?

• Whatisitthatvisitorsexpectfromamuseumdisplay?• Howdoyouaddresstheseconcernsinpractice?

Iwasparticularlyconcernedaboutissuesofreflexivity,curatorial"honesty",constructionofthepastandtheresponsibilityandremitofmuseums.Inaddition,Iwasinterestedinvisitors’competenceandexperiencein"reading"displaysandhowmuseumsmusttakethatintoaccount.Theliteraturereviewwasbasedonthesequestions.


2 Literature review Museumsprofesstotellstories;storiesaboutsocialandnaturalhistory.Objectsusuallyformthebasisoratleastalargepartofthosestories.Inthecaseofstoriestoldusingarchaeologicalartefacts,thoseobjectsareoftenthe“smallthingsforgotten”(Deetz1977).Butthetellingofsuchstoriesusingsuchobjectsisproblematiconanumberoflevels.Whiletextiscommonlyemployedintheformoflabelsandinformationboards,andrarelyquestioned,doesitconstituteastory?Whatisastory?Whatstorydoarchaeologistsandcuratorschoosetotellandhowdotheytellit?Museologistsandarchaeologistsaregrapplingwiththeethical,philosophicalandpoliticalaspectsofmuseumstorytelling.Thefollowingreviewexploresthechallengesinherentintellingastorywithobjectsinamuseum,thewiderpoliticalfactorsinvolvedinpublicstorytellingandthedifferentapproachestakenbycuratorstotryandmeetthosechallenges.

Whatisastory?Storiesresistdefinition;wegenerallyrecogniseastorywhenweseeorhearone,buttyingastorytodefinitivecriteriahasprovendifficult(Leitch1986).However,someoftheattributesofstoryarerecognisableandthreearemostpertinenttotheinterpretationofarchaeologyinamuseumsetting(Leitch1986:25‐26):

• astoryisanarrativeworthtelling• itcanonlyexistasatransactionwithanaudience,and• theaudienceneedstounderstandthetypeofdiscourseemployedbythe

storytellerinordertomakesenseofthestory.Leitchdistinguishesbetweennarrativeandstory,andassertsthat,ifanarrativeisnotworththetelling,itisnotastory.Relevance,then,maybekeytothesuccessofamuseum“story”.Storyenablesamuseumtoconnecttoanon‐specialistaudiencemoreeasilybypersonalisingbarefacts(Swain2007:10).Storycanalsoexploresocialrelationsinawaythatartefactualanalysiscannot(Gibb2000:6).Allofwhichimpliesanaudience:towhomisthestoryrelevant?Astorysimplydoesnotexistwithoutanaudiencetohear,seeorreadit,andtheaudiencebringsitsowninterpretationtoastory.Thetellingofastoryisa“transaction”ratherthanthedeliveryofaone‐way“message”(Leitch1986),buttheaudienceneedstounderstandtheconventionsofthestory’sform.Leitch(1986:34)describessuchcompetenceas“narrativity”andstatesthatitislearnedinchildhood;otherscallit“culturalcompetence”(Stam2005:58).Lackoffamiliaritywiththecurators’storytellingmodemightexplainwhy,intheUK,olderpeoplearelesslikelytovisitmuseumsbecausetheywereunfamiliarwiththemwhengrowingup(Swain2007:200)andwhytheNationalMuseumoftheAmericanIndian,forexample,provedsochallengingforsomevisitorswhenitopened(Cobb2005;Smith2005).Displayseschewedlabels,werebasedonIndigenousratherthanWesterncuratorialsystemsofclassification(Smith2005:429&431)andemployeda“spiderweb”,ratherthanlinearlayout(Cobb2005:503).Criticsdeploredthelackof“’scholarship’or‘crisplessons’”intheexhibits(Cobb2005:502).WhileCobbdiscussesthe


critiquesfromthepointofviewofwhosevoiceisbeingheard(IndigenousversusWesterncuratorial),sheobservesthat:

Clearlyallthreeofthesecriticsbegantheircritiquesfromtheassumptions…thatexhibitionsmustmeetthestandardsofdiscretedisciplinesandmustteachcrisp,cleanlylabelledlessons–assumptionsthatarebasedonyearsofexperiencewithWesternmuseumsandacademicdisciplines(2005:502‐503).

Inotherwords,thecriticsshequoteswerefamiliarwithacertainmodeofmuseumstorytellingandcouldnot“read”amuseumstorythatemployeddifferentmethods.Recognisingthis,Cobbadvocatesthatthemuseumitselfneedsto“preparevisitorsforwhattheywillexperience,lettingthemknowthattheywillbeaskedto‘read’differentlyandaskingthemtorisetotheoccasion”(2005:505).

Whatstorytotell?Evenwhenstorytellerandaudienceinamuseumsettingshareadiscourseorstorytellingmode,whatstoryistobetold?Launiussaysthatvisitorswillconnectmostreadilywithstoriesthatresonatewiththeirpersonalexperienceandthatoffamilyandcloseassociates.Beyondthat“events,epochsandthemesdiscussedthroughoutthebroadexpanseofhistoryhaveessentiallyanequalimportance”(Launius2007:23‐24).Swain(2007:270)agrees.

[M]embersofthepublicfeelmoreexcitedaboutafindthatmoreattachedtheyaretoit.Andthisattachmentcomesformtheirnearnessinspaceandtime.Beingshownarelativelyunimportantfindthatwasfoundontheirstreetyesterdaybecomesasimportantasafamousancienttreasurefoundhundredsofyearsagoinanothercountry.

Soarchaeologydealswiththepast,butwhichpast?Thereisnomonolithicpastwaitingtobeuncoveredandanalysed“scientifically”(Bender1995;ShanksandTilley1992).Instead,archaeologists,museumcuratorsandhistorianscreatethepasttoservearangeofcontemporaryhumaninterests(Gagnon1982:26;Holtorf2005:6;ShanksandTilley1992:14,25).ForHoltorf(2005:60)archaeologicalartefactshavenointrinsicmeaning–meaningisrathercreatedbythosepresentingthemandagainbythoseviewingthem‐andthereisnodirectcorrelationbetweentherelationshipofobjectsandastoryofthepast(Geertz1973:17;ShanksandTilley1992:13).Objectsinamuseumarefarremovedfromtheiroriginalsocialandphysicalcontexts.Simplybydintofdisplayingitinaglasscabinetinamuseum,ametalthimblemorphsfromadiscardedorlostutilitariansewingtoolintoarepresentativeofthepast.Notonlythat,itisnowfardistantfromitscompanionsintheprivy—whichmightsayasmuchabouttheoriginallifeofthethimbleasthethimbleitself—soitmustrepresentthatpastintheabsenceofthosematerialrelationships.Anditiscertainlyfardistantfromthewomanwhooriginallyusedit.AsSwain(2007:214)putsit,themuseumis“falseandunreal”.Thearchaeologistandmuseumcuratormustthereforebeacutelyawareoftheirownsituatedposition(politicallyandwithinanintellectualprocess)whendecidingwhatstorytotellofasiteandofthe


factthattheyareproducingnewmeaningfortheobjects(Holtorf2005;Joyce2006;ShanksandTilley1992).Whilearchaeologistsandcuratorsmaybeawareoftheownsituation,theydonotoperateinapoliticalvacuum.Launius(2007:20)observesthattheSmithsonianInstitutionhasbeen“cowed”throughanumberofencounterswiththepoliticalrightinwhathedescribesas“culturalwar”.Asaresultthecurators“seemincreasinglytoconstrainthemselvestopresentingmaterialthatwillnotarousecontroversy.Asubtextofconsensushistory,aone‐nation,one‐peopleperspective,predominates”(Launius2007:22).

Howtotellthestory?Tellingastoryofthepastinamuseum,then,isapostmoderndilemmawithamoralandpoliticaldimension.Howthendoyouconveythenatureofthedifferentdataarchaeologicalevidencebringstothestudyofthepast,itsinherentlimitations(Joyce2006,Skeates2002)andtherealityofthecreationofthatpastbyarchaeologistsandcurators?Doyoueventrywhenyouraudienceisaslikelytobevisitingthemuseumforentertainmentasedification(Hudson1977:1)andexpectssomecertaintyfromtheprofessionalstellingthestory(Swain2007:214)?Howdoyoutapintothe“concernforlocalandpersonalhistory”thatLaunius(2007:23)saysis“routinelyexpressedbyvisitorsattheSmithsonianInstitution”?Somecuratorshaveattemptedtodothisbymakingthemselvesvisible–attributingtextandlabelstothepeoplewhowrotethem(ShanksandTilley1992:97;Swain2007:216),thuschallengingthenotionoftheobjectivecuratorialvoice.Othershavepositedmorethanoneinterpretationofthedataandaskedvisitorstodecide(Skeates2002:209),challengingthenotionofanunquestionedversionofthepast(Swain2007:244).Speakingparticularlyofthe“PeoplebeforeLondon”exhibit,Skeatessaysthat“summativeevaluation,anecdotalevidenceandpersonobservationindicate[e]thatmostvisitorsseemtohaveappreciatedtheirapproach”(Skeates2002:214)PublishedcriticsdidnotrespondedpositivelytothisorexamplesdiscussedbySwain.Saville,forexample,attackswhathecalls“extremesofpostmodernism”andseesthemas“underminingcoremuseologicalvalues(1999citedinSwain2007:49).Inanattempttodemonstratethattherearemanypossiblepastsbeyondthelinearnarrativeconstructedbyarchaeologists,Bender(1995)collectedviewsofthe“meaning“ofStonehengefromarangeofgroupsandthenprovidedvisitorswiththemeanstoleavetheirowncomments.Inthreeyearsvisitorsleftaround400comments(Bender1995:57)suggestingthat,ifnothingelse,theywelcomedtheopportunitytohavetheirsay.Bender’sapproachisperhapsthemostexplicitexampleofthetransactionalnatureofstorytellinginthecontextofdisplaysofhistory.Leitch(1986:123)assertsthatagoodstorytellerleavesgapsfortheaudiencetofillin;thisiswhatkeepsthemengaged.Likewise,Geertz(1973:20)statesthatwedonothavetoknoweverythingaboutasubjectinordertounderstandit.Thisissomethingcuratorsseemtostrugglewith:howmuchinterpretationdoyouneedtoprovideandhowmuchdoyouleavetotheaudiencetoworkoutforthemselves?Georgedescribeshis


reactiontoanunnamedexhibition:“…Ifeltdemeaned,asifIhadbeenledbythenosethroughacannedpresentationofslicklypackagedpap.IfeltIhadbeenmadetoreadahistorytextbook…”(GeorgecitedinStam2005:63).InordertoavoidsuchoverworkingGreyetal(2006:33)advisethat“[t]hevoice(s)youuseneednotknoweverything.Theycouldleaveroomforinvestigationandexploration,orroomfortheaudiencetodrawtheirownconclusions”.Theuseofmultiplevoices(multi‐vocality)andtheinterweavingoffictionalandhistoricalvoiceshasbeenexploredinthecontextofwritingaboutarchaeology(Joyceetal2002;Joyce2006;Little2000;Majewski2000;McKee2000;Praetzellis1998;Praetzellisetal1998;Schrire1995;Yamin2002)tocreatewhatJoyce(2006:57)calls“thestratifiedlanguage”ofthetimeandplacebeingrepresented.Harkingbacktothenotionofmanypasts,nosinglestory,shesays,canadequatelyaccountforthepastbeingstudied(Joyce2006:49).Museologistsasmuchasarchaeologistsandanthropologistsarestrugglingwiththepowerissuesinherentin“representation”(e.g.Geertz1973;Pieterse2005),whetherthosebeingrepresentedarepre‐contactIndigenouspeoplesortheworkingpoorofanineteenthcenturycity.Whilemuseologistsandarchaeologistscontinuetoexperimentwithhowtotellstories,George(citedinStam2005:63)questionsthewholeenterprise.Amuseumshouldaskitselfnot‘Whatstorydowewanttotell?’,butrather‘Whatquestionsdowewanttoraise?’.


3 Methodology TheresearchmethodologyIemployedwasbasedonpreparationfortheoriginaltaskofwritingartefactlabels.Itincludedmuseumvisits,artefactanalysis,consultationswithHeritageVictoriapersonnel,aliteraturereviewofsimilarexcavationsandlimitedhistoricalresearch.ThedataIgatheredgavemetheconfidenceandthematerialtodraftthecatalogueessay.

3.1 Museum visits Ivisitedanumberofmuseums(anddrewonnotesfromamuseumvisitlastyear)tolearnhowdifferentinstitutionsdesignandpresentexhibits.Archaeologicalartefactsusuallyformpartofotherlargerexhibits;howeverasmostmuseumdisplaysareobject‐based,itwasstillvaluableexperience.Thesearethemuseumsvisitedinthelast12months:

• MuseumofSouthAustralia(October2010)• TutankhamunandtheGoldenAgeofthePharoahs,MelbourneMuseum

(April2011)• MelbourneMuseum(May‐June2011)• ImmigrationMuseumMelbourne(July2011)• NationalMuseumofAustralia(August2011)• MuseumofNewZealandTePapaTongarewa(August2011)

3.2 Artefact analysis IspenttwosessionsintheHeritageVictorialaboratoryinCollingwood(Melbourne)familiarisingmyselfwithandphotographingtheartefactsthathadbeenselectedaspossibleinclusionsintheexhibit.TheHeritageVictoriaCuratorialOfficergavemecopiesofpreliminaryartefactdatabasepreparedbyarchaeologistswhoconductedtheexcavationandthereviseddatabaseofexhibitionartefactsthatshehadprepared.Iaddedmyphotographsoftheartefactstothereviseddatabase.Ialsohadacopyofthesitereporttoassist.Thoughtherewereabouttwiceasmanyartefactsselectedandrecataloguedascanbeusedintheexhibition,theydidgivemeagoodsenseoftheextentoftheassemblageandthenatureoftheartefactsrecovered.Thisfirsthandfamiliaritywiththeartefactsprovedextremelyhelpfulinpreparingthecatalogueessay.

3.3 Consultations with Heritage Victoria personnel Ihaveconsultedwiththreepeopleinvolvedwiththeexcavationorcareoftheassemblage.

• ImetandcorrespondedwithHeritageVictoriaarchaeologist,DavidBannear,onanumberofoccasions.

• TheCuratorialOfficerattheHeritageVictorialaboratory,AnnieMuir,wasgenerouswithhertimeandexpertiseduringbothmyvisits.


• IvisitedtheceramicsconsultantonForestStreetexcavation,DennisO’Hoy,whoseinsightsintotheearlyhistoryofBendigosetthedirectionofmysubsequentreadingandtheshapeofthecatalogueessay.

3.4 Literature review IreadaswidelyasIcouldonhistoricalarchaeology,especiallyinAustralia,togainanunderstandingofhowtogoaboutmakingsenseoftheassemblage.Giventhetimeavailable,itwasnecessarilyabriefreview.

3.5 Historical research Theconsultantarchaeologists,DIGInternational,hademployedahistoriantoresearchthehistoricalbackgroundofthesite.However,thehistoricalsummaryshewrote(SterenbergandFord2011:5‐13)didnotcoverissuesaboutwhichIhadquestionsasIfamiliarisedmyselfwiththeassemblageandsitereport.BothanindependentcriticandBendigoPostOfficeGallerycurator,SandraBruce,raisedotherquestionsafterreadingthefirstdraftofthecatalogueessay.ThispromptedashortperiodofhistoricalresearchintheGoldfieldsResearchCentreandreadingsinlocalhistorytogainbackgroundonBendigo’swatersupply,sanitation/seweragearrangements,thenamesoftenantsnotlistedinthehistorian’ssummaryandthesortsofbusinessesoperatingintheneighbourhoodofthesite.


4 Exegesis on writing the catalogue essay 4.1 Aims of the essay Thecatalogueessaywillaccompanyanexhibitionofartefactsfromthe2009excavationofasiteinForestStreet,Bendigo.Thesiteisnotoneofnationalsignificance.Thearchaeologicalconsultantswhoconductedtheexcavationstatethatthedataisof“considerablesignificancetoBendigo”andtheartefactcollection“ofsignificancetothestate[ofVictoria]”(Sterenberg&Ford2010:135).AccordingtoSwain(2007:270)“membersofthepublicfeelmoreexcitedaboutafindthemoreattachedtheyaretoit.Andthisattachmentcomesfromtheirnearnessintimeandspace”.TheHeritageVictoriaarchaeologistassistingwiththeexhibitioncertainlyconsideredthatthemainaudiencewillbeBendigoresidents.TheBendigoPostOfficeGallerycuratorwantedtheexhibitiontotellboththe“story”ofthesiteandshowhowarchaeologyrevealedthatstory.Thosetwostipulationsdeterminedtheshapeofthecatalogueessay.AcommentmadebytheHeritageVictoriaCuratorialOfficer,Anne‐LouiseMuir,whenIvisitedthelaboratoryalsoinfluencedtheessay.“Archaeologyshouldnotbeusedtojustillustratehistory,”shesaid.“Itcantellusthingsthathistorycan’t.”Oneofthethingsitcantellusis“thecontextandconditionsofa[culturalartefact’s]productionandappropriation(ShanksandTilley1992:15).AsSwain(2007:9)pointsout,theproblemwithmuseumexhibitsisthattheartefactshavebeenremovedfromtheiroriginalcontextandreplacedwithsomethingentirelyforeigntothecontextinwhichthoseartefactsweremadeandused:thedisplaycase.Thecatalogueessayprovidedanopportunitytore‐establishasenseoftheoriginalcontextasarchaeologicaldataandbeforethatasmaterialculture.IndoingthisIwasinfluencedbyarchaeologist/writerssuchasLawrence(2000),Praetzellisetal(1997),PraetzellisandPraetzellis(1998),Schrire(1995)andSpector(1991).Ideliberatelysetouttoemulatethem.

4.2 Challenges UnlikethewritersIsoughttoemulate,IhadnotworkedontheexcavationIwaswritingaboutandfacedanumberofchallengesininterpretingit.Thesitereportandtheartefactsdatabaseweremyprimarysourcesofdata.Apparentlythereportwaspresentedinsixvolumes,ofwhichthemain(written)reportandthedatabasewereonlytwo.Ididnothaveaccesstothecontextandfeaturesheets;registeroflevels,plansandphotos;siteplansorDVDcontainingphotographsoftheexcavation.Ifounditdifficult,therefore,tolocateonthesitecontextsandfeaturesreferredtointhereport.Thesitereport(SterenbergandFord2011)providedagoodhistoricalbackground,andsummaryofthefindings,butthesummarywastoobrieftoprovidemeenough


materialfortheessay.Thetechnicalreportsectionofthesitereport,whilethorough,wasdenseanddifficulttounderstand.Theartefactsdatabasepreparedbytheconsultingarchaeologistswasonlyapreliminary(andnotverythorough)analysis.Whentheexhibitionwasfirstmooted,theHeritageVictoriaCuratorialOfficerpulledfromtheassemblageasub‐collectionofitemsthatwouldbesuitablefordisplay.Shere‐cataloguedallthoseitemsandsentmebothdatabases.Asmyoriginaltaskhadbeentowriteexhibitionlabelsfortheobjects,IspenttwosessionsattheHeritageVictorialaboratoryfamiliarisingmyselfwiththoseobjectsandtheseconddatabase.Itquicklybecameobviousthatitwasonlypartofthestory.SoIhadtoworkacrossthetwodatabases,theoriginalmuchlesscarefullypreparedthanthesecondanddetailingobjectsIhadnotseenandofwhichtherewerenophotographs.Finally,theexhibition’sthemehadbeendecidedearlybythecuratoroftheBendigoPostOfficeGallery.WhilemanyinterestingthemesaroseincourseofanalysingthedataIhadaccessto,theframeworkofthecatalogueessayandtheexhibititselfhadbeendeterminedbytheexhibitionbrief.

4.3 The interpretive process Writingarchaeology,especiallyforanon‐specialistaudience,isverymuchtheinterpretiveprocess.Asaprocess,itmustbefoundedinthedata;theartefactsandfeaturesuncoveredduringtheexcavationmustbethebasisofthestoryevenifitalsoreferstodatafromotherarchaeologicalsites.Butartefactsinthemselvesmeannothing.“Meaningisproducedinthematerialpracticeofreasoninginthepresent,whichis,ofcourse,innowayidenticalwiththepast”(ShanksandTilley1992:76).IwasveryconsciousthatIwascreatingmeaningfromthearchaeologicalandhistoricaldatatowhichIhadaccess,butoriginallyforgotthatareaderwasnot.Anindependentcriticofthefirstdraftaskedagainandagainthebasisofmyinterpretation.—HowdoyouknowtheyusedWorcestershireSauce?—Howdoyouknowthechamberpotwaspartofaset?—Howdoyouknowtheperfumebottlesbelongedtoapersoninthathouse?—Becausealltheartefactswerefoundonthesiteandlocatedneareachofthosehouses,Ianswered.—Butyoudon’ttellmethat,shereplied.SoIwasalsoconcernedthatareaderunderstoodbothhowwhattheywerereadinghadbeenproducedandthatitdidnotrepresentthewhole“truth”ofthesite.(ThatiswhyItitledthatsectionOne,notThe,storyofForestStreet.Atthesametime,Ididnotwanttoborethemwiththetheoreticalunderpinningsofmyposition.Finally,Iwaspainfullyawareofmystatusasastudentandnoviceinterpreterwith


farlessexperiencethantheHeritageVictoriaarchaeologistwhohadworkedontheexcavationandwasnowadvisingtheartgallerycuratorontheexhibition.TherewaseverypossibilitythatIwould“getitwrong”.Theshapeoftheessayaimstowalkthereaderthroughthehistoricalbackgroundandwhatwasfoundbythearchaeologists.ItthenexplainshowImadesenseofthetwobeforeproceedingtotheinterpretationitself.PerhapsifIhadbeencompletelyhonesttomytheoreticalleaningsIwouldhavepositionedmyselfandmydoubtsmoreexplicitlyintheessay.ButIwasnotconfidentthatsucharadicaldeparturefromtheauthoritativecuratorialvoicewouldbewelcome.

4.4 Broadening the context Thearchaeologicalreportnecessarilyfocussedexclusivelyonthesite.Steppingoutsidetheconfinesofthearchaeologicalsiteandthesite‐specifichistoricalbackgroundwasnecessarytomakesenseofsomeofthedata.Whiletheinterpretationmustbebasedonthesitedata,ithelpedtoknowwhatyouwouldhaveseenifyoulookedoverthestreetorhowthesanitaryarrangementsofBendigochangedfromcesspitstonightcartservicesquiteearlyinthelifeofthecityorhowtheresidentsobtainedwater.InthiswayIdiscoveredanotherboardinghousefurtherupForestStreetandthenamesofsomeoftheresidentswhohadlivedonthesite,aswellasasecondliverystableandanironmongerontheothersideoftheroad.Thepresenceoftheselasttwobusinessesgavemetheconfidencetodeclarethatablacksmithorfarrierranaworkshoponthesite.Eventhoughtherewasnospecificmentionofitinthesummaryorthehistoricalbackground,buriedinthetechnicalsectionofthereportwasadescriptionofthetypeofwasteproducedbyablacksmith.Sothenoiseandsmellofablacksmith’sshopdidfindaplaceintheessay.

4.5 Telling the story InwritingthestoryIhadtousetheexhibitionbriefasaframework,butIdrewonshortstoryandjournalisticfeaturewritingtechniques.Agoodfeaturearticlelaunchesthereaderstraightintoananecdotethatcapturestheessenceofthesubjectofthearticle

Theclassicstructureofthetypicalfeaturearticleis:• beginwithananecdote(tobuttonholethereader)• followthiswithastatementofyourtheme• illustrateyourthemewithsomefactsandquotes• brightenitwithananecdoteortwo• illustratewithmorefactsandquotes• brightenwithanotheranecdoteortwo• conclude(Dunlevy1988:5).

Thelittleboyplayingoncarpetedstairswasthe“anecdote”thatIusedto“buttonholethereader”.IwantedtothrowthereaderstraightintotheForestStreetrevealedthroughthearchaeologicaldata,asyouwouldalsodoinashort


story.Iwantedthemtoknowthatthiswouldnotbeadrydescriptionofartefacts,butasensorytripintoapastsuggestedbythoseartefacts.ShanksandTilley(1992:14)assertthat“thereisnosimpledirectroutefromobjectsandtheirrelationshipstoconventionalnarrativehistory”.Myanecdotesweregainedfrom“interviewing”thedata;buttheydonot,andarenotintendedto,givealinealnarrativeofthesite.Instead,Itriedtogivethereadera“feel”forthesite.Joyce(2006:63)describesexperimentalwritinginhistoricalarchaeologythatjuxtaposesmultipletimesandspaces:

Suchplace‐basednon‐causalnarratives,oftenintheformofwhatRebeccaYamin(1998a)calls‘vignettes’,communicateasenseofthefragmentarynatureofarchaeologicalunderstandingwhilerepresentingthedensityofdetailavailableforindividualintervalsoftime.

Swain(2007:10)statesthattheobviouswaytohelpvisitorstoanexhibitionconnectwitharchaeologyisbytellingthemstoriesofpeople.Thesameistrueofwritingaboutarchaeology.Bringingpeopleintothenarrativerequiresanimaginativeleapthattakesthewriterbeyondstraightdescriptionofartefacts.Gibb(2000:3)suggeststhat,aswellasholdinggreatpromiseforengagingnon‐specialistaudiences,interpretivehistoricalfiction“canprovideapowerfulanalyticaltool,anexplicitlysubjectivebutrigorousmeansofexploringarchaeologicalandarchivaldata”:

Storytellingisaformofexperimentationandanalysisinwhichthestoryteller‐analystexaminescertainconditionswhileholdingothersconstant,determininghowtheactorsmighthavebehaved.Insightsderivedfromsuchtalesmayhavetestableimplications(Gibb2000:6)

Iwouldnotsuggestthatmyfirstattemptatsuchinterpretationprovidestestableimplications,butIcertainlyhopethatitstandsasaworthyexampleofhowtoengageanon‐specialistaudience.


5 Catalogue essay Thetextofthecatalogueessayfollows.CaptionsforillustrationsthataccompanythetextareincludedinappendixError!Referencesourcenotfound..WhileIdeterminedtheshapeandstructureofthedocument,partofthetextwascontributedbyHeritageVictoriaarchaeologist,DavidBannear;thisisdenotedinabluefont.TheformattingoftheendnotesfollowstherequirementsoftheBendigoArtGallery.


HiddenWorlds:glimpsesfromBendigo’sForestStreetarchaeologicalexcavationOneafternooninthelatenineteenthcentury,asmallboysatonthecarpetedstairstothebasementofhishomeinForestStreetplayingatracehorses.Perhapshewastryingtoescapehissisterswhowantedhimtoplayattea.Perhapsitwassimplyraining.Inanyevent,itwasasaddayforhimbecausesomehowhelostoneofhishorses.Alongwiththestairs,thetinymetalhorsesurvivedthelaterdemolitionofthehouseuntilanarchaeologistfoundityearslater.We’llneverknowthelittleboy’sname,butweknowhelivedandplayedtherebecausehislosttoybearswitnesstohispresence.ItisjustthissortofglimpseintotheprivatelivesofthecitizenswhosenamesarenotrecordedintheAnnalsofBendigothatarchaeologycangiveus.Inthebrokencups,platesandbottleswecanseefragmentsoflivesthatwereneverdocumented.

RecoveringheritageForfiveweeksin2009,passers‐byinForestStreetcouldstandononesideofacyclonewirefenceandwatchateamofarchaeologistsscrapingaway150yearsofBendigo’shistoryontheother.ThisscenewasbeingplayedoutbecausetheVictorianHeritageAct(1995)protectsarchaeologicalsitesandrelics.AdministratedbyHeritageVictoria,theActrequiresdevelopers,wherenecessary,tofundarchaeologicalexcavationstodocumentandrecoverevidenceoftheearlysettlementofVictoria.FormingthewesternedgeoftheoriginalcentralbusinessdistrictofBendigo(formerlySandhurst),ForestStreethasbeenintensivelyoccupiedsincethegoldrush.HeritageVictoriaconsideredthatarchaeologywasnecessarybecausethebuildingsitewaslikelytoyieldawealthofburiedarchaeologicalevidence.Inaddition,theconstructionofasubsurfacecarparkmeanttherewouldbesubstantialdestructionofarchaeologicaldeposits.Researchshowedthatthearchaeologicalevidencewouldcomprisethefoundationsofmasonryandtimberbuildings,laneways,andartefacts(suchascrockery,bottles,jewellery,toysandfoodscraps)associatedwiththepeoplewhohadoncebeenlivedandworkedthere.Thearchaeologistscarefullydugawaythelayersofsoilandrubblethathadaccumulatedovermanydecades,beginningwiththemostrecentlayers‐thoseonthetop‐andworkingthroughtotheoldest‐thoselowerdown.Thisstratigraphicalapproach(alsocalledrelativedating)enablesarchaeologiststoattributeartefactstotheircorrecttimeperiods.Archaeologicalexcavationisdoneinconjunctionwithdetailedsite‐mappingsothatrecoveredartefactscanbelinkedtotheexactlocationswheretheywereused,lostordiscarded.Throughthesemethodsofdiggingandrecording,archaeologistscanultimatelybuildupanaccuratepictureofhowpeoplelivedandhowdailylifechangedasBendigoevolvedfromagoldrushtowntoagreatcity.

ScouringthepagesofhistoryTohelpthearchaeologiststodecidehowbesttocarryouttheirinvestigations,particularlydealingwiththediscoveryofacomplexsequenceofbuildingfoundations,ahistorianwas


employedtoundertaketheresearchnecessarytobuildapictureofhowthesitedevelopedovertime–wherebuildingshadbeenlocatedandhowtheywereconstructed,used,alteredanddemolished.Theresearchinvolvedvisitingdifferentrepositoriesforhistoricaldocuments(forexample,theStateLibraryofVictoria,LandInformationCentre,PublicRecordsOfficeofVictoria,andNorthCentralGoldfieldsRegionalLibrary)toploughthrougharangeofdifferentdocumentsincludinggenealogyinformationandmaps;certificatesoftitle,clerks’notes,andCrownLandgrants;probaterecords;andMunicipalDirectoriesandratesbooks.Ofparticularvaluewasa1935fireinsurancesurveythatshowedthetypeofstructuresandtheirlocationuponthesite.Thehistoricalresearchshowedthatthelandhadbeenusedforbothresidentialandbusinesslifefromasearlyas1856duringthegoldrusheratothepresentday.WhenitwasofficiallysubdivideditwasterracedandcomprisedthreeCrownLandallotments:10(lowerterrace),11(middleterrace)and12(upperterrace),ForestStreet,Sandhurst.

Lowerterrace:hotelaccommodation,stables,boardinghouseAllotment10hadtwoquitedifferentbusinessstreams:onerevolvingaroundhotelandaccommodationlifeandtheotherstablinghorses.TheRoyalHotelwasoperatingontheblockfromtheearly1860swithAmeliaTurneroneofitsearlyproprietors.Thehotel’sbarentrancewasonHighStreetandthoseseekingaccommodationenteredthroughForestStreet.AfterAmeliaTurnertherewasasuccessionofhotelkeepersincludingEdwinGarnett;WilliamPallettandlaterPallett’swidowSophiawhoranthehotelfrom1888totheearly1900s.Thehotelbecameaboardinghousein1920runbyRuthAndersonandsurvivedasabusinessuntilthe1950s.Theboardinghousewasdescribedin1956as“atwo‐storeybrickandstonebuildingcontainingfifteenrooms,twobathroomsandlaundry”.1Theliverystablesalsohadanumberofproprietors.TheoriginalbusinesswasassociatedwithAmeliaTurner,whofromthe1870sprogressivelyleasedittoJohnEdwardFeatherstone,JamesCrowley,andWilliamandEuphemiaToomer.By1916thewesternpartofthestableshadbeendemolishedandashopwasbuiltforMiller&Company,MachineryMerchants.Thiscompanyremainedtheoccupantofthebuildingthroughtothemid1950s.Probaterecordsfortheproperty’sownerin1956describeditas“abrickofficeandyard(withfloor)withgalvanisedironroof…Oldstoneandbrickstablesareerectedalongtherearboundaryoftheproperty”.2

Middleterrace:houses,warehouse,church,garage,wreckingbusinessRatebookentriesshowthatAllotment11containedahousein1856thatwasoccupiedbyJohnGardner(alsospeltGardiner).By1865,Gardner’swidow,Fanny,islistedastheownerandtheallotmentcontainedtwohousesandaworkshop.Bythelate1880sallthebuildingshadbeendemolishedandawarehousebuilt,whichwasuseduntil1924byvariousimportersandmanufacturers’agents.After1924thebuildingwasusedasaPentecostal


Churchuntilthemid1950s.Fromaround1961thebuildingwasamotorgarageandthenbecameawreckingbusinesswhichisstillrememberedbylocalresidents.

Upperterrace:houses,boardinghouseAllotment12wasoccupiedbyatleast1860andcontainedtwoearlyhouses;thelandremainedundertheownershipofJamesBoydandhisfamilyuntilthe1920s.Around1900thetwohouseswerecombinedintoasinglelargepropertyforuseasaboardinghouse.Aseriesoffemaleboarding‐housekeepersarerecordedastheratepayerbetween1904and1912.In1916thehousewasunoccupiedandthenpurchasedbyElizabethHarneywhoreturnedittoaprivatedwellinginthe1920s.UponHarney’sdeathin1954,probatedescribedthephysicalimprovements:“nine‐roomedbrickhouseofveryoldtypebuiltontostreetfrontageandinpoorstateofrepair,requiringanewironroof”.3

UnearthingghostsBy2007twocarparksandanowemptywarehouseoccupiedmuchofthesite.Openaircarparkshaveonearchaeologicallyfriendlyfeature:theyhavenofoundations.Simplylevelthesite,coveritingravelorasphaltandstartparkingcars.Thecarparkseffectivelysealedthestoryofthesiteatthetimethelastbuildingwasdemolished.4Likewise,thewarehousehadnoload‐bearinginternalwalls,soitshistorywassealedunderaconcretefloor.Thearchaeologicalevidenceconcealedbeneaththesesurfacesrevealedmuchmoreaboutthesiteanditschangingusesthancouldbegleanedfromratebooksandmunicipaldirectoriesalone,includingatleastonebusinessthatisnotreferredtointhedocuments.TheJaarapeopleoccupiedtheregionbeforeEuropeansettlement,butthearchaeologistsfoundnomaterialevidenceofanAboriginalpresenceatForestStreet,mostlikelybecauseanysuchevidencehadbeendestroyedthroughlateractivityonthesite.Extensivetreerootsystemswerefoundindicatingthatthehillsidewasoriginallycoveredbytreesandasmallsilted‐upwatercoursethatrandownthehilltojointheBendigoCreekatthebottomofthesite.Whenthegoldrushstarted,thetopofthehillseemstohavebeenatentcamp,whileholesdugforwoodenpostsandbarrelsindicatedearlydivisionsoftheland.Furtherdownthehillweretheremainsofasmalltimberdwellingwithslatehearthandachimney.Therewasalsoaseriesofrectangularpits,severalwithtimberliningandbases,whosepurposeisamystery,aswellasafour‐metredeepmineshaft.Theminershitbedrock,andsometimeafteritwasabandonedtheshaftwasback‐filled.Whenthesitewasformallysubdividedthethreeterraceswerecutintotheslope.Thecombinationofanearliernaturalwatercourseandsubsidenceinthemineshaftfillseemstohavecausedongoingdrainageproblemsforlaterbuilders.ThehouseontheupperterraceincorporatedalargebasementwithatimberflooroverlyingacementlineddrainthatranouttoForestStreet.TheconcretefloorofthewarehouseonthemiddleterraceoverlayedasectionofearlyBendigoPotteryceramicdrain.Andonthelowerterrace,thebasementofthehotelaccommodationincorporatedalargemetalgrateanddrain.Theexcavationuncovereddetailsoftheconstructionofthevariousbuildingsonthesite,revealingalanewayatthebackoftheterraceswhichwouldhaveprovidedaccesstothevariousworkshopssituatedthere,asectionofcobbledfloorfromtheliverystablesand


foundationsandwallsofneatlycut,newsandstoneblocks.Onthemiddleterraceseverallayersofclinkerandsmeltingwaste(by‐productsofblacksmithing)werefoundwhichincludedfragmentsofburntbrick,corrodedmetalandahand‐manufactured16.5inch(42cm)coachbolt.Backontheupperterrace,someofthestairsleadingtothebasementstillhadbrasscarpetrodsattached.Outthebacktwobrickcesspitswereuncoveredwithatrailofcharcoalashleadingtothebackdoorofthehouse,suggestinganattempttokeepthesmelldown.Anotherbrickcesspitwasuncoveredonthemiddleterrace.Thecesspitsseemtohavebeenemptiedregularlyastheyretainednoevidenceofeffluent.Atsomestagethehouseholdersstoppedusingthemwhenanightcartsystemwasintroducedtothetown.Thecesspitswerethenbackfilledwithhouseholdrefuse,thusbecomingamongthemostartefact‐richlocationsonthesite.Rubbishisafeatureofallperiodsofthesite.Thefirstresidents,theminers,simplydumpedtheirbottlesandanimalbonesneartheirlivingquarters,leavingbehindevidenceofwhattheydrankandate,andwhattheydrankandatefrom:beerandsaladoilbottles,fragmentsofceramicplatesandteacups.Asmallshoebelongingtoawomanorchildalsohintsthatitwasn’tjustmaleminerslivingonthesite.Theprivies(orcesspits)provideasnapshotofthelaterhouseholdswhentheresidentswereusingthemasrubbishdumps.Thehotelaccommodationalsofeaturedatleastonecesspitandittoowasarichsourceofartefacts.Rubbishwasalsofoundunderstairs,itemsweredroppedandlostinworkshops,anddebriswasburiedintheongoingprocessofdemolishingandreconstructingbuildings.5

MakingsenseofthedataOncethearchaeologistshadfinishedtheirwork,buildersmovedintoconstructanewofficecomplexforthesite’sowners,whichwasofficiallyopenedinMarch2011.ThearchaeologistscollatedalloftheirdataintoareportanddepositedtheartefactsintothecareofHeritageVictoria.Transformingthedataintothestoryofasiteisaninterpretiveprocessthatisacombinationofscienceandimagination.Itmustbebasedonwhatwasfound:onlytheartefactsrecoveredfromthesiteandtherecordedfeaturesshouldfindaplaceinthestory.OnasitesuchasForestStreet,documentedhistorycanhelpmakesenseofwhatwasfound,ascanpublisheddiscussionsabouthowotherarchaeologistshaveinterpretedsimilarsites.Archaeologyisinactualityaboutpeopleratherthanobjects.Whowerethepeoplewholivedandworkedonthesite;peoplenowlonggone,butwhowerecloseenoughtothemanicactivityofthegoldrushtorememberit?Agooddoseofhistoricalimaginationhelpsturnquestionsabouthowanobjectmighthavebeenused,whouseditandwhatitmeanttothemintoastory,evenifwewillneverknowtheirnames.Alittlemetalhorsewasfoundontheupperterraceundertheremainsofstairsthatwereoncecarpeted.Itisquitepossiblethattheboywholivedthereplayedonthestairsandthehorsefellthroughacrack.Itisalsopossibleitgottherethroughquiteadifferentsequenceofevents.Anyinterpretationofasiteisjustthat:aninterpretation.Newthinkinginthefieldofarchaeologymightchangehowthedataisinterpreted;someoneelsemayseedifferentconnectionsbetweenthedata.Buteverystorybuildsourunderstandingofthepeoplewholeftthosetracesbehind.


TellingonestoryofForestStreet ArespectablehouseholdIntheidealworldofthenineteenthandearlytwentiethcenturies,theplaceforarespectablewomanwasinherhome.6Therealitywasthatmanywomenfoundthemselvesinneedofanincometosupportthemselvesorafamilyandtheiroptionswereseverelylimited.7AcrossAustralia,boardinghouseswerehometobothsinglepeopleandfamilieswhocouldnotaffordtorent,muchlessbuytheirownhouse.8Moreoftenthannot,awomanrantheboardinghouse;itwasasociallyacceptablewayforhertoearnalivingasitwasseenasanexpansionofherworkinthehome.9WhenMrsBessieHayesoperatedthehouseonthetopterraceasaboardinghousein1907itwasoneoftwoinForestStreetand44inBendigo.Allbuttwowererunbywomen,andofthose38weredesignated“Mrs”.10BythenBendigohouseholdshadbeenconnectedtoawatersupplyfornearly40years,butareticulatedseweragesystemwasstill30yearsaway.11Itwasalongwalkthroughthebackyardinthedarktorelieveyourselfatnight,sochamberpotswerefamiliarcompanyinthebedroom.Everymorningsomeonehadtheunenviabletaskofemptyingthepotsintotheprivyorpantoilet,whichmayitselfhaveonlybeenemptiedonceaweek.Tokeepdowntheinevitablesmell,ashfromthestovefireboxwascarrieddowntothetoilet,leavingatell‐taletrailfromthebackdoorofthehousedowntheyard.12Fourchamberpotswererecoveredfromthetopterrace;onlyonewasundecorated.Twomusthavebeenpartofmatchingsetsasawashbowlinthesamemarblepatternwasalsofound.Giventheirrelativelyhumblestationinlife,thatthehouseholderchosedecoratedchamberpotsandmatchingsetsthatincludedwashbowlsandperhapsjugssuggeststhatshetookcareshoppingforherfurnishingsandprideinherhouse.13Wecan’tyetbesurewhethertheitemsinthetopterraceprivybelongedtotheboardinghouseoperatorsandresidents,orthetenantswhooccupiedthehousesbeforethem.14Butforaboardinghousekeeper,herhousewasatthesametimeherbusinesspremisesandherhome.Keepingarespectablehousewouldhavebeengoodbusinesspractice.Eventhetenantswhoprecededthemwouldhavebeenconsciousthattheywerebeingjudgedsociallyonthepublicspacesintheirhome.15Ifyouhadvisitedthemforteaitwouldhavebeenservedinmatchingcupsandsaucersinasittingroomgracedbychinafigurines.16SinceceramicsdealersintheVictoriancolonyimportedonlythefinestchinaandthebestkindofearthenwarefromEngland,youwouldhavebeendrinkingfromthebestBritishteawaresavailable.17WhileChineseporcelainmakesupagoodportionoftheceramicsfoundinsitesaroundSydneyanditwascertainlyusedbyearlierminingresidentsinBendigo,itdoesnotshowuplaterinForestStreet.18ThehouseholdershereseemtohavedonetheirshoppingwiththegrocersanddepartmentstoresinPallMallratherthantheChinesetradersinBridgeStreet.ItmaybebecausePallMallwascloser,oritmayhavebeensocialstricturesthatpreventedEuropeanwomenfromshoppingwiththeChinesetradersinBridgeStreet.Evenso,whilethePallMalltradersprovidedadazzlingarrayofchoices,someitemsfoundintheprivypre‐datethesettlementofBendigo.Forexample,ifyourteawaspouredfromalustrefinishedteapot,youmighthaveguessedthiswasatreasureditembroughtfromEnglandwiththefamily.19


ThebestchinafordinnerJustdownthestreetatthehotelaccommodation,acupofteawasnotsuchanevent.20Thethirstyguestsseemtohavepreferredgingerbeer,aeratedwater,beer,wineandevenchampagne.ManyofthesebeverageswouldhavebeenproducedinBendigowhichboastedbreweriesandathrivingwineindustry.21Inthediningroomyouwouldnothavefoundthecheapcreamwareceramicsthatweretheequivalentoftoday’scommercialwhiteceramics.22Instead,asaguestoftheRoyalHotel,yourmealswouldhavebeenservedfrommatchinggreyRhinepatternedplatters.WhileWorcestershiresauce,Clubsauceandothercondimentsaddedpiquancytotheboiledorroastmeat,youmightevenhavebeentreatedtocurriedoystersbroughtupfromMelbournebytrain.23Overtheyears,theplatesandbowlsfromwhichyoudinedfeatureddecorativeprintsinpurple,brownandgreen.Perhapsyouwereserveddessertfrommouldedglassbowls,andyourdrinkswouldcertainlyhavebeenservedinmatchingglasstumblers.Likethehousekeeperacoupleofdoorsuponthetopterrace,thehotelier’schoiceindiningandglasswarespeaksofaconcerntopresentthehotelaccommodationasarespectableestablishment.PerhapsAmeliaTurner,hotelkeeperfromatleast1866,chosesomeofthem.24Ifthatisthecase,herhotellodgingmusthavehadagoodreputation,andshecertainlydidwellenoughfromherbusinessendeavourstoacquirethetwohousesonthelotnextdoorin1879.25

BusinessisbusinessThelowerendofForestStreetwouldnothavebeenaquietplacetolivewithnoisy,smellybusinessesoperatingrightnextdoortoresidences.TheliverystablesbehindtheRoyalHoteloperatedformorethan50yearshiringouthorsesandtakingcareofotherpeople’s.Youwouldhaveheardthewhinnyingofhorsesandtheclatterofhoovesonthelanewayandcobbledstablefloor,andsmelledfreshmanureandoldstraw.PerhapsyouwouldalsohaveheardthestablehandssoothingtheanimalsastheytreatedinjurieswithRowsEmbrocationorFarmer’sFriend.Acrossthestreetwasanotherliverystable,sotherewouldhavebeenhorsescomingandgoingallday,andonthecorneroppositetheRoyalHotel,ConnellyandCoIronmongershadsetupbusinessby1907.26Perhapstheyhadbeentherelongenoughtosupplytheblacksmithorfarrierwhooccupiedoneoftheworkshopsbehindthehousesonthemiddleterrace.Withtwoliverystablesatthatendofthestreet,itmusthavebeenabusyshop:ringinghammerblowsandscreechoffiling,thehissofhotmetalbeingcooledinawaterbarrel,horsescloppingdowntheaccesslane,thesmellofhotiron.Intheyardsbetweentheworkshopsthewastefuelandslagwastossedoutfromtheforge.Whenthehousesandworkshopsonthemiddleterraceweredemolishedby1888,theywerereplacedbyanothercommercialoperation.Fivewarehousemanandimporters/manufacturers’agentssetupshop.Thiswouldhaveaddedtothealreadyconstanttraffic,initiallyhorsedrawnandperhapslater,motorised.Itmaywellhavecomeasareliefwhenthewarehousewasconvertedintoachurchinthemid1920s.27


AbattlewithdirtThepeoplewholivedonthemiddleterracebeforethewarehousewasbuiltdidnotleavemanytraces.FannyGardner(whosehusbandJohndiedsometimebefore1865)hadlivedtheresincethemid1850s.ThechemistGeorgeDormanseemstohavebeenatenantin1872.Itispossiblethatwhenthehousesweredemolishedtomakewayforanewhallintheearly1890s,theprocessdestroyedmostofthecluestheymayhaveleft.28Certainlyatleastonewomanwhowasfondofandcouldaffordtobuyperfumelivedthere.Perfumemayhavebeenanindulgence,orshemayhavethoughtitanecessityinacitychronicallyshortofwater.Untilconnectiontothereticulatedwatersupplybecamecompulsoryafter1865,peoplesourcedtheirdomesticwaterfromarangeofplaces.Thosewhocouldafforditboughtwaterfromwatercarts–originallyfilledfromsmallminingdamsorabandonedmineshafts,laterfromstandpipesscatteredaroundthetownincludingoneinForestStreet.Thosewhocouldnotsourcedwaterwherevertheycouldfindit:intherun‐offfromroofs,orinpuddlesandwatercoursespollutedbypuddlingsludgeandhumanwaste.29Miningactivitytookplacerightinthetownuntiltheearlytwentiethcenturyandinthelate1870sBendigoCreekwascloggedwithhumanandanimalexcrementandthewastefromslaughteryards.30Thesmell,especiallyinsummer,wasoverwhelminganddiphtheria,dysentery,typhoidanddiarrhoearagedthroughthetown.31TheresidentsatthebottomofForestStreetlivedonly50metresfromthecreekandwouldnothavebeenabletoescapethesmell.In1865,therewassuchashortageofwateralloverBendigothatpuddlingmillsandcrushingmachinescouldnotoperateandthousandsofminerswereoutofwork.32ThingsweresodesperatebytheendofthatyeartheVictorianRailwaysstartedbringingtrainloadsoftwelve400‐gallonwrought‐ironwatertankstoBendigo.33Dailyablutionswerelargelydispensedwithandclotheswornlongaftertheyshouldhavebeeninthewashtub,observedoneresident.34“Thenwewereamongthe‘greatunwashed’,”wroteanotherofthemid‐nineteenthcentury.35Theroadswereunpaved,andmuchlatertheartistOlaCohnrememberedthedustofherchildhood:“Thenorthwindblewthesandfromtheminemullockheaps,causingcloudsofdust,andwhirlwindsdancedaferociouswaltzthroughthestreets.”36Keepingcleanundertheseconditionswasbothachallengeandahealthimperative.TheresidentsofForestStreettriedtotreatarangeofailmentswithjarsofointments,nowunlabelled,andbottlesofproprietarymedicinefromDrJamesBoydofViewPointSandhurst.37SomeoneobviouslythoughtHolloway’sointment,whichclaimedtocureeverythingfrominveterateulcersandsoreheadstorheumatism,wasworthtryingatleastonce.PerhapsGeorgeDormanthechemistsometimesworkedathome,asglasstubesreminiscentofpipetteswerefoundintheprivyonthemiddleterrace.Infrequentbathingalsoseemedtocauseproblemswithhair,giventhenumberofnitcombsandbottlesofhairtonicrecoveredfromthesite.Buttheresidentsdidkeeptheirteethclean,withcherryflavouredtoothpasteandbreath‐fresheningtonics.


KidsontheblockWhetherthechildrencouldbeconvincedtocleantheirteetheachnightisunknown.Thattherewerechildreniscertain.Aswellaschildren’sshoes,aremarkablenumberoftoyswerepresentontheupperterrace.Thegirlshadminiatureteasetsandporcelaindollstoplaywith;theboyshadmarblesandmetalhorses,knownashorseflats.Remnantsofslateandslatepencilsmayhavebelongedtothechildrenaswell.Itislikelytheyallwenttoschoolatleasttotheageof12,asstateprimaryeducationinVictoriawasnotonlyfreebutcompulsoryby1899.38Onebrotherandsisterwererewardedfortheirgoodbehaviourwithchinacupsbearingtheinscriptions“Apresentforagoodboy”and“Apresentforagoodgirl”.Theywereingoodcompany:theircontemporariesaroundtheworldwerelikewiseexhortedtogoodbehaviourwithsuch“moralisingchina”.39SimilaritemshavebeenfoundintheRocksinSydney;afarminMelrose,SouthAustralia;andtheFivePointsDistrictinNewYork.40.Thesewerechildrenwhoseparentsobviouslyinvestedtimeandeffortintheirmoralandintellectualeducation.Notsurprisingly,thereisnoevidenceofchildrenonthesiteofthehotelaccommodation.Nextdooronthemiddleterracewheretwohousesprecededthehallandwarehouse,thereisapoignanthintofababy.AlongsidetheperfumebottleswasaglassSpecialFeedingBottle,perhapsusedbyamotherwhowasunabletobreastfeedherbaby.Thebabywouldhavebeenfedthroughatubefittedintoacorkintheneckofthebottle.Inthosedaysthetubecouldnotbecleanedproperlyandbabiesoftendiedfromabacterialinfection,earningthemthesobriquet“murderbottles”.41WiththepoorqualityofwateravailableinBendigo,keepingthisonecleanwouldcertainlyhavebeendifficult.Wedon’tknowwhothebabywasorwhetheritsurvived,butheorshebeganlifeinatimewhenyoucouldstillstumbleonabushgravewhileoutforawalk,atimewhenthefinalrestingplaceofawholefamilylosttodiphtheriaduringthegoldrushmayhavebeenmarkedonlybyacairnofrocksorafewnotchesinatree,andisnowlonggone.42

Aglimpse‐andtheworkcontinuesThefeedingbottle,theteasets,toys,medicinebottlesandchamberpotshavesurvived,alongwiththousandsofotherartefactsuncoveredonthesite,andgiveustantalisingglimpsesofthepeoplewholivedandworkedinForestStreet,Bendigo.Overthecourseofthatfiveweekexcavation,over4,000artefactswereunearthedandpreservedforposterity.43Yetexcavatingasiteisonlythestartofthearchaeologists’work.Itisthehoursofresearching:poringoverartefacts,sitemaps,notesandreferencematerialthatcanreallyfleshoutthestoryofanexcavation,andthepeoplewhomadeandusedit.ThisworkhasbarelybegunwiththeForestStreetsite,andperhapsonedaywewillhavemorethanjusthintsofthehiddenworldofitsresidentsandthelivestheyled.


Notes1Sterenberg,JandAFord2010,‘ForestStreet,Bendigo2009,ArchaeologicalExcavationReport’,ExcavationreportpreparedbyDIGInternationalPtyLtd,OceanGrove,fore+architecture,p.162SterenbergandFord,ibid.,p.163SterenbergandFord,ibid.,p.114SterenbergandFord,ibid.,p.19;alsoExpertVoices:UnearthingLittleLon2008,video,MuseumVictoria,Melbourne,videotoaccompanyLittleLonexhibition5SterenbergandFord,ibid.,sections7Findingsand8TechnicalReport6Russell,G2009,WaterforGold!:TheFighttoQuenchCentralVictoria’sGoldfields,AustralianScholarlyPublishing,NorthMelbourne,p.287Inthe1891Victoriancensus21.15percentofwomenwereclassedasincomeearners.By1899womenrepresentednearly27percentofhandsemployedinvariousmanufacturingindustries.Inbothcases,womeninVictoriaoutnumberedwomeninothercolonies.Coghlan,T1900,AStatisticalAccountoftheSevenColoniesofAustralasia,GovernmentofNewSouthWales,Sydney,pp.596‐5988The1891Victoriancensusshowed1,333“board,lodginghousekeepersandwifeassisting”and“otherengagedinboardinglodgingandentertaininginMelbourne”,citedinDavision,G1978,‘Sydneyandthebush:anurbancontextfortheAustralianLegend’,HistoricalStudies,vol.18,no.71,p.1949Lydon,J1998,‘Boarding‐housesintheRocks:MrsAnnLewis’privy,1865’inMCasey,DDonlon,JHope,SWellfare(eds)RedefiningArchaeology:FeministPerspectives,ANHPublications,RSPAS,TheAustralianNationalUniversity,Canberra,p.13910SandsandMcDougall’sBendigoSuburbanandDistrictDirectoryfor1907‐1908,SandsandMcDougallLimited,Melbourne11Russell,Gop.cit.,p.207(reticulatedwatersupply)andp.138(reticulatedsewerage)12SterenbergandFordop.cit.,p.4113Crook,P2000,‘ShoppingandHistoricalArchaeology:ExploringtheContextsofUrbanConsumption’inAustralasianHistoricalArchaeology,vol.18,pp.17‐28;andCook,L,RYaminandJMcCarthy1996,‘ShoppingasMeaningfulAction:TowardaRedefinitionofConsumptioninHistoricalArchaeology’,HistoricalArchaeology,vol.30,no.4,pp.50‐6514“Thiswasbasedonseveralceramicitemstheartefactassemblagefrom[2005]wasdatedtobetween1870and1920”(sic)–whichcoversboththeperiodoftenantsandboardinghouse.SterenbergandFord,op.cit.,p.9015Russell,P1993,‘InSearchofWoman’sPlace:AnHistoricalSurveyofGenderandSpaceinNineteenthCenturyAustralia’AustralasianHistoricalArchaeology,vol.11,pp.28‐3216TheassemblageincludesthreesetsofmatchingironstonecupsandsaucerswithBerlinswirlpattern.ItwasonlyimportedintoAustraliafromthe1860s(20yearsafterBritishpottersfirstexportedittoUS)becausetheUScivilwarhadclosedportsthere.Brooks,A2005,AnArchaeologicalGuidetoBritishCeramicsinAustralia1788‐1901,TheAustralasianSocietyforHistoricalArchaeologyandtheLaTrobeUniversityArchaeologyProgram,SydneyandMelbourne,p.6017Brooks,ibid.,p.6018Staniforth,M2003,‘”Annales”‐InformedApproachestotheArchaeologyofColonialAustralia’,HistoricalArchaeology,vol.37,no.1,p.106inrelationtoSydneyimports;O’Hoy,D2011,personalcommunicationinrelationtoBendigoimportsofChineseceramics.19Brooks,op.cit.,p.4020Alltheteawaresforthisperiodhavecomefromthetopterrace.21Bruce,S2011,BeginninginBendigo:fromhumbleoriginstoacapturedmarket,BendigoArtGallery,Bendigo,p.4(inrelationtoCohnsbrewers);andMcKay,G1891,HistoryofBendigo,MacKay&Co,Bendigo,Facsimileeditionof1891editionpublishedin2000,p.77(inrelationtowineindustry)22Miller,G1991,‘ARevisedSetofCCIndexValuesforClassificationandEconomicScalingofEnglishCeramicsfrom1787to1880’,HistoricalArchaeology,vol.25,no.1,p.1.Thereisdiscussionthat


Miller’sindexcan’tbetransferredtoAustralianconditionsbecauseeconomicandpoliticalfactorsweresodifferentinNorthAmerica(seeforexampleBrooksop.cit.,p.6),butitwouldstillbefairtosaycreamwarewasthecheapesttypeofceramiconthemarket.23Anumberofoystershellsarerecordedintheartefactsdatabase.TheywouldhavecomebytrainafterthelinetoMelbourneopenedinOctober1862(SeeMackayop.cit.,p.43).ThefirsticemakingfactoryopenedinMelbournein1859andJohnBrightwaslistedasafishmongerinBathLaneinthe1897‐98Voters’RollforTheSuttonWardoftheCityofBendigo.ForcurriedoystersseeMrsMaclurcan’sCookeryBook(3rdedition1899)citedinBannerman,C1996,AFriendintheKitchen:OldAustralianCookeryBooks,KangarooPress,Kenthurst,p.174.AccordingtoBannerman,HannahMaclurcanwasahotelkeeper,originallyfromTownsville.24SterenbergandFordop.cit.,p.725SterenbergandFordibid.,p.1026Sands&McDougallLtdop.cit.JamesKennedy’sliverystableswerelistednextdoortotheironmongersinthe1907‐1908directory.27SterenbergandFordop.cit.,p.1028SterenbergandFordibid.,p.1029Russell,Gop.cit.,p.73inrelationtomineshaftanddamwaterandp.56inrelationtostandpipes30Russell,Gibid.,p.4031Russell,Gibid.,pp.132‐13832MacKayop.cit.,p.131inrelationtowatercartsandp.77inrelationtoout‐of‐workminers33Russell,Gop.cit.,p.12934Russell,Gibid.,p.11935MacartneyJN1882,Sandhurst:Asitwasandasitis,citedinButcher,MandYCollins2000,AnAmericanontheGoldfields:TheBendigoPhotographsofBenjaminPierceBatchelder,HollandHousePublishing,Strathdale,p.1936Cohn,O1964,‘TheSpiritoftheBush’unpublishedmanuscriptinPapers1912‐1964heldinStateLibraryofVictoria37BendigowasofficiallynamedSandhurstwhenitbecameacityin1871,butresidentslobbiedhardtohaveitchangedtoBendigo,thenamebywhichthedistricthadlongbeenknown.Afteravotebyratepayersthenamewaschangedin1891.38Coghlanop.cit.,p.38839SonamedbyarchaeologistGrahamWilson,citedinKarskens,G2001,‘ThearchaeologyofSydney’sRocksneighbourhood’,inAMayneandTMurray(eds)TheArchaeologyofUrbanLandscapes:ExplorationsinSlumland,CambridgeUniversityPress,Cambridge,p.7440FortheRocksseeKarskensibid.,p.76;forMelroseseeCremin,A2001,1901:AustralianLifeatFederation:AnIllustratedChronicle,UniversityofNewSouthWalesPress,Sydney,p.7;forNewYorkseeYamin,R2002,‘Children’sStrikes,Parents’Rights:PatersonandFivePoints’,InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology,vol.6,no.2,p.12141Muir,A(CuratorialOfficer,HeritageVictoria)2011,personalcommunication42Cohnop.cit.43Itisdifficulttosayexactlyhowmanyartefactswererecoveredasmanyarefragments.Thetotalnumberoffragmentsisjustunder6,000.ManyfragmentscanandarebeingreassembledintoartefactsaspartoftheconservationworkundertakenbyHeritageVictoria.Withothersitcanbedifficulttodeterminewhethertheyarefragmentsofoneobjectofsamplesofmany.


6 Conclusions WhilemypartinthepreparationoftheHiddenWorldsexhibitioninBendigowasoriginallytodraftlabeltextforartefacts,thebroadfocusofthisdirectedstudywasthecommunicationofarchaeologicalfindingstonon‐specialistaudiences.Iconcentratedonmuseumsandwrittentextsbecauseoftherequirementsofmyinvolvementintheexhibition,butthechallengesofcommunicatingwithnon‐specialistsextendacrossallmedia.Thosechallengesshareacommonthread:storytelling.Atfacevalueitmayseemsimpleenoughto“tellthestory”ofasite,manyarchaeologistsandmuseumcuratorsstrugglewithquestionsaboutwhatstorytotellandwhy.Archaeology,andsubsequentcommunicationofitsfindings,isaninterpretativeprocess.Itdoesnotsimplyuncoverthe“truth”aboutthepast,sostorytellingaboutthepastrequiresaninterpreter(archaeologistorcuratorforexample)tocreatethestory,totakethephysicalevidenceandmakeastatementaboutwhatitmightsayaboutthepeoplewholeftthatevidencebehind.Suchastatementcannever,therefore,bethe“truth”;itreliesforitscreationontheknowledgeandinterestsofthepersonorpeoplecreatingit.Ataregionallevelthestorytoldinanexhibitionlikethismayarousenointerestbeyondthelocalsandeventhenonlyamongthoseinterestedinlocalhistory;butifthestoryisdeemedofnationalimportanceitcancertainlyarousestronginterest.Itisinthiscontextthattheroleofsuchstorytellingincreatingoursenseofourselvesinthepresentisevidenced.TheconflictatanationalpoliticalleveloccasionedbysomeexhibitscuratedbythemuseumsoftheSmithsonianInstitutionforexampleillustratesjusthowimportantsuchstorytellingcanbe.Theawarenessthatinterpretivetextsorexhibitionsareexactlythat–interpretations–hasledtoexperimentationanddebateamongspecialists.Inthese(sometimesheated)debatesbetweencritics,archaeologistsandcurators,thenon‐specialistaudiencestowhomthesestoriesaredirectedrarelyspeak.Perhapsthedirectionofmyreadingandmuseumvisits,focussingastheydidontechniquesandtheory,simplymissedtheexperienceofthe“ordinary”visitor.CertainlythereferencesIcameacrosstothereactionsofmuseumvisitorsweremediatedbyaresearcher.SoIcouldonlyrelyonmyownreactionstoexhibitsandtextsasaguidetowhatmightcommunicateastoryofarchaeologytoanon‐specialistaudiencemosteffectively.ThoseIadmiredandtriedtoemulatewerewritersorexhibitstowhichIrespondedonanemotionallevel,thoseIfeltevokedmoststronglya“feel”forasite.Iwas,andremain,tentativeaboutmyinterpretationoftheForestStreetsite.TheawarenessthatIwascreatingmeaningisaburden;butIbelieveevenmorestronglynowthatarchaeologyisawasteoftimeifnooneoutsidethe“heritageindustry”hearsaboutit.Fromalocaltoanationallevel,thematerialremainsofthepastcontributetoadeepersenseofplaceevenifthatsenseiscontestableandcontested,andperhapsitisevenbetterifitiscontested.Creatingasenseorfeelingforplaceisathoroughlynon‐scientificgoal.Yetitrequiresastrong“scientific”,evidence‐basedfoundation.Onthatfoundationisbuilta“non‐scientific”


artisticcreation,aresponsetotheevidence.Thechallengeremainstomarrysuchseeminglydisparateapproachesintoaunionthatengagesthenon‐specialistatanemotionallevel.Itisverydifficulttodoasitdemandssteppingoutsidetheconventionsofscientificreporting.Isuspect–andhope‐thattheexperimentationanddebatewillcontinue.Whatbetterindicationisthereofagoodstorythanonethatstirsstrongpassions?


7 References 7.1 Literature review Bender,B.1995Multivocalisminpractice:alternativeviewsofStonehenge.InG.T.Denford

(ed.)TheMuseumArchaeologist,ProceedingsoftheSocietyofMuseumArchaeologistsConference22.pp.55‐58.London:SocietyofMuseumArchaeologists.

Cobb,A.2005TheNationalMuseumoftheAmericanIndianasCulturalSovereignty.AmericanQuarterly57(2):485‐506.

Deetz,J.1977InSmallThingsForgotten:TheArchaeologyofEarlyAmericanLife.GardenCity,NewYork:AnchorPress/Doubleday.

Gagnon,S.1982ManandHisPast:TheNatureandRoleofHistoriography.Montreal:HarvestHouse.

Geertz,C.1973ThickDescription:TowardanInterpretiveTheoryofCulture,inTheInterpretationofCultures:SelectedEssaysbyCliffordGertz,pp.3‐30.NewYork:BasicBooks,AmemberofthePerseusBooksGroup.

Gibb,J.G.2000,Imaginary,ButByNoMeansUnimaginable:Storytelling,Science,andHistoricalArchaeology.HistoricalArchaeology34(2):1‐6.

Grey,A.,T.GardomandC.Booth2006Sayingitdifferently,ahandbookformuseumsrefreshingtheirdisplays.London:LondonMuseumsHub.

Holtorf,C.2005FromStonehengetoLasVegas:ArchaeologyinPopularCulture.WalnutCreek:AltamiraPress‐adivisionofRowman&LittlefieldPublishersInc.

Hudson,K.1977Introduction.InMuseumsforthe1980s:asurveyofworldtrends,pp.1‐6.London:Macmillan.ReproducedinDeakinUniversityAustralia2011Museums:ContextsandIssuesAIM721StudyGuideandReadings.Geelong:DeakinUniversityAustralia.

Joyce,R.2006Writinghistoricalarchaeology.InM.BeaudryandD.Hicks(eds)TheCambridgeCompaniontoHistoricalArchaeology,pp.48‐65.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Joyce,R.,R.Preucel,C.GuyerandJ.Lopiparo2002TheLanguagesofArchaeology:dialogue,narrative,andwriting.Malden:BlackwellPublishing.

Launius,R.2007AmericanMemory,CultureWars,andtheChallengeofPresentingScienceandTechnologyinaNationalMuseum.ThePublicHistorian29(1):13‐30.

Leitch,T.1986Whatstoriesare.UniversityPark:ThePennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress.

Little,B.J.2000CompellingImagesthroughStorytelling:Commenton‘Imaginary,ButByNoMeansUnimaginable:Storytelling,Science,andHistoricalArchaeology'.HistoricalArchaeology34(2):10‐13.

Majewski,T.2000WeAreAllStorytellers:Commentson‘Storytelling,Science,andHistoricalArchaeology’.HistoricalArchaeology34(2):17‐19.

McKee,L.andJ.Galle2000ScientificCreativityandCreativeScience:LookingattheFutureofArchaeologicalStorytelling.HistoricalArchaeology34(2):14‐16.


Pieterse,J.N.2005Multiculturalismandmuseums:discourseaboutothersintheageofglobalization.InGerardCorsane(ed.),Heritage,MuseumsandGalleries:AnIntroductoryReader,pp.163‐183.London:Routledge.

Praetzellis,A.andM.Praetzellis1998AConnecticutMerchantinChinadom:APlayinOneAct.HistoricalArchaeology32(1):86‐93.

Praetzellis,A.G.H.ZiesingandM.Praetzelis1997TalesoftheVasco,LosVaquerosProjectFinalReport#5.RohnertPark:AnthropologicalStudiesCentre,SonomaStateUniversityAcademicFoundationInc.

Schrire,C.1995DiggingThroughDarkness:ChroniclesofanArchaeologist.Charlottesville:UniversityPressofVirginia.

Shanks,M.andC.Tilley1992ReconstructingArchaeology:TheoryandPractice,2ndedn.London:Routledge.

Skeates,R.2002Speakingforthepastinthepresent:text,authorityandlearninginarchaeologymuseums.PublicArchaeology2(4):209‐18.

Smith,C.2005Decolonisingthemuseum:theNationalMuseumoftheAmericanIndianinWashington,DC.Antiquity79(304):424‐439.

Stam,D.2005Theinformedmuse:theimplicationsof'TheNewMuseology'formuseumpractice.InGerardCorsane(ed),Heritage,MuseumsandGalleries:AnIntroductoryReader,pp.54‐70.London:Routledge.

Swain,H.2007Anintroductiontomuseumarchaeology.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Yamin,R.2002Children'sStrikes,Parents'Rights:PatersonandFivePoints.InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology6(2):113‐26.

7.2 Exegesis on writing the catalogue essay Dunlevy,M1988FeatureWriting.Geelong:DeakinUniversity.

Gibb,J2000Imaginary,butbynomeansunimaginable:Storytelling,scienceandhistoricalarchaeology.HistoricalArchaeology34(2):1‐6.

Joyce,R2006Writinghistoricalarchaeology,inMBeaudryandDHicks(eds)TheCambridgeCompaniontoHistoricalArchaeology,p.48‐65.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

Lawrence,S2000Dolly’sCreek:AnArchaeologyofaVictorianGoldfieldsCommunity.CarltonSouth:MelbourneUniversityPress.

Praetzellis,A,GZeising,MPraetzellis1997,TalesoftheVasco,LosVaquerosProjectFinalReport#5.RohnertParkCalifornia:AnthropologicalStudiesCentre,SonomaStateUniversityAcademicFoundationInc.

Praetzellis,AandMPraetzellis1998,AConneticutMerchantinChinadom:APlayinOneAct.HistoricalArchaeology32(1):86‐93.


Schrire,C1995DiggingThroughDarkness:ChroniclesofanArchaeologist.Charlottesville:UniversityPressofVirginia.

Shanks,M.andC.Tilley1992ReconstructingArchaeology:TheoryandPractice,2ndedn.London:Routledge.

Spector,J1991WhatThisAwlMeans:TowardaFeministArchaeologyinJGeroandMConkey(eds)EngenderingArchaeology:WomenandPrehistory.Oxford:Blackwell.

Sterenberg,JandAFord2010,ForestStreet,Bendigo2009,ArchaeologicalExcavationReport,Volume1ofexcavationreportpreparedbyDIGInternationalPtyLtd,OceanGrove,fore+architecture

Swain,H2007Anintroductiontomuseumarchaeology.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.

7.3 Catalogue essay Bannerman,C1996AFriendintheKitchen:OldAustralianCookeryBooks.Kenthurst:

KangarooPress.

Brooks,A2005AnArchaeologicalGuidetoBritishCeramicsinAustralia1788‐1901.SydneyandMelbourne:TheAustralasianSocietyforHistoricalArchaeologyandTheLaTrobeUniversityArchaeologyProgram.

Bruce,S2011BeginninginBendigo:fromhumbleoriginstoacapturedmarket.Bendigo:BendigoArtGallery.

Butcher,MandYCollins2001AnAmericanontheGoldfields:TheBendigoPhotographsofBenjaminPierceBatchelder.Strathdale:HollandHousePublishing.

Coghlan,TA1900AStatisticalAccountoftheSevenColoniesofAustralasia.Sydney:GovernmentofNewSouthWales.

Cohn,O1964TheSpiritoftheBush,unpublishedmanuscriptinPapers1912‐1964heldbyStateLibraryofVictoria.

Cook,L,RYaminandJMcCarthy1996ShoppingasMeaningfulAction:TowardaRedefinitionofConsumptioninHistoricalArchaeology.HistoricalArchaeology30(4):50‐65

Cremin,A20011901:AustralianLifeatFederation:AnIllustratedChronicle.Sydney:UniversityofNewSouthWalesPress.

Crook,P2000ShoppingandHistoricalArchaeology:ExploringtheContextsofUrbanConsumption.AustralasianHistoricalArchaeology18:17‐28.

Davision,G1978Sydneyandthebush:AnurbancontextfortheAustralianlegend.HistoricalStudies18(71):191‐209.

ExpertVoices:UnearthingLittleLon2008,video,Melbourne:MuseumVictoria.VideotoaccompanyLittleLonexhibition.

Hyett,J2002Variationonatheme:ThearchaeologyofanAustralianblacksmith’sshop.AustralasianHistoricalArchaeology20:92‐95.

Karskens,G2001ThearchaeologyofSydney'sRocksneighbourhood.InAMayneandTMurray(eds)TheArchaeologyofUrbanLandscapes:ExplorationsinSlumland.,pp.69‐85.Cambridge:CambridgeUniversityPress.


Light,JD2007ADictionaryofBlacksmithingTerms.HistoricalArchaeology41(2):84‐157.

Lydon,J1998Boarding‐housesintheRocks:MrsAnnLewis'privy,1865.InMCasey,DDonlon,JHopeandSWellfare(eds)RedefiningArchaeology:FeministPerspectives,pp.138‐144.Canberra:ANHPublications,RSPAS,TheAustralianNationalUniversity.

Mackay,G1891HistoryofBendigo.Bendigo:MacKay&Co.Facsimileof1891editionpublished2000Bendigo:Lerk&McClure.

Miller,G1991ARevisedSetofCCIndexValuesforClassificationandEconomicScalingofEnglishCeramicsfrom1787to1880.HistoricalArchaeology25(1):1‐25.

Muir,A(CuratorialOfficer,HeritageVictoria)2011,29JulyPersonalcommunication.

Muir,A2011Upload,reviseddatabaseofForestStreetexhibitionartefactsbasedonSterenbergandFordVolume2.

O’Hoy,D2011,26AugustPersonalcommunication.

Russell,G2009WaterforGold!:TheFighttoQuenchCentralVictoria’sGoldfields.NorthMelbourne:AustralianScholarlyPublishing.

Russell,P1993InSearchofWoman’sPlace:AnHistoricalSurveyofGenderandSpaceinNineteenth‐CenturyAustralia.AustralasianHistoricalArchaeology11:28‐32.

Staniforth,M2003‘Annales’‐InformedApproachestotheArchaeologyofColonialAustralia.HistoricalArchaeology37(1):102‐13.

Sterenberg,JandAFord2010ForestStreet,Bendigo2009,ArchaeologicalExcavationReport,Volume1ofexcavationreportpreparedbyDIGInternationalPtyLtd,OceanGrove,fore+architecture.

Sterenberg,JandAFord2010ForestStreetCombined(artefactsdatabase)Volume2ofexcavationreportpreparedbyDIGInternationalPtyLtd,OceanGrove,fore+architecture.

Yamin,R2002Children'sStrikes,Parents'Rights:PatersonandFivePoints.InternationalJournalofHistoricalArchaeology6(2):113‐126


8 Appendix NewspaperarticlesabouttheForestStreetexcavationandassemblage

Forest Street Archaeology Exhibition Post Office Gallery ... · Forest Street Archaeology...

Documents

Transcript of Forest Street Archaeology Exhibition Post Office Gallery ... · Forest Street Archaeology...