HUNTER ESTATES
A Comparative Heritage Study of pre 1850s Homestead Complexes in the Hunter Region Volume II Appendix 3: Historic Archaeology Report CLIVE LUCAS, STAPLETON & PARTNERS PTY LTD Appendices
Hunter Estates Comparative Heritage Study CLIVE LUCAS, STAPLETON & PARTNERS PTY LTD Appendices
Appendix 3: Historic Archaeology Report
Hunter Estates Comparative Heritage Study CLIVE LUCAS, STAPLETON & PARTNERS PTY LTD Appendices
Hunter Estates Comparative Heritage Study NINETEENTH CENTURY RURAL HOMESTEAD COMPLEXES IN THE HUNTER REGION. HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
Tocal, Tocal Road, Tocal NSW 2421 (Google Maps).
Edward A K Higginbotham, MA (Cambridge), PhD (Sydney), MAACAI. EDWARD HIGGINBOTHAM & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD.
Archaeology • History • & Heritage
A.B.N. 79 072 316 968 NINETEENTH CENTURY RURAL HOMESTEAD COMPLEXES IN THE HUNTER REGION. HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SURVEY.
Edward Higginbotham MA (Cambridge), PhD (Sydney), MAACAI. EDWARD HIGGINBOTHAM & ASSOCIATES PTY LTD 13 O’Connor Street HABERFIELD, NSW 2045. PO Box 97 HABERFIELD, NSW 2045. Phone. (02) 9716-5154 [email protected] www.higginbotham.com.au
For Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners.
Draft September 2012 Final Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
CONTENTS.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS...... iv 1 INTRODUCTION...... 1 1.1 Background...... 1 1.2 Brief...... 1 1.3 Location of site...... 1 1.4 Heritage Listings...... 1 1.5 Study methodology and limitations...... 2 1.6 Author identification...... 3 2 THE EXTENT OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE...... 5 2.1 Methodology...... 5 2.2 Definition of a Nineteenth Century Rural Homestead Complex...... 5 2.3 Historical sources for mapping the archaeological resource...... 6 2.4 The identification of individual properties...... 7 2.5 Figures...... 10 3 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT IN THE HUNTER REGION...... 15 3.1 Distribution of rural settlement within the Settled Districts...... 15 3.2 Historical settlement typologies...... 16 3.3 Settlement hierarchies...... 18 3.4 Sample Bias...... 18 3.5 Correcting the bias in the surviving evidence...... 19 3.6 The evolution of the homestead complex and "Settlement Type Dynamics"...... 21 3.7 Curtilages and archaeological assessment...... 22 3.8 Principal improvements found on homestead complexes...... 23 3.9 Table. Survey of improvements on 51 homestead complexes in the Goulburn Mulwaree LGA, 2009-2010...... 25 3.10 Property databases...... 28 3.11 Figures...... 29 4 THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT LISTINGS...... 33 4.1 Introduction to assessment methodology...... 33 4.2 Preliminary selection of sites for archaeological assessment...... 34 4.3 Sites requiring further research prior to assessment...... 35 4.4 Results of baseline archaeological assessment...... 36 4.5 Provisional List of sites for site inspection...... 36 4.6 Provisional List of Archaeological Sites...... 39 4.7 The disturbance of archaeological sites...... 39 4.8 A note on significance...... 40 4.9 Figures...... 42
ii Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS...... 44 6 RECOMMENDATIONS...... 45 APPENDIX 1. CADASTRAL MAPS OF EACH LOCAL COUNCIL AREA, SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTIES ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE 1850S...... 47 APPENDIX 2. BASELINE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT. THE FORMAT OF THE DATABASE...... 60 Location and Address...... 60 Description of House and Outbuildings...... 60 Typology of Sites...... 62 Description of Farm Layout...... 63 Description of Farm Plantings and Landscaping...... 64 APPENDIX 3. PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF SITES IN THE CLSP HOMESTEAD DATABASE...... 66
iii Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.
The author would like to thank
Client: Hector Abrahams and Kate Denny, Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners.
Aboriginal Dominic Steele, Dominic Steele Consulting Archaeology. Archaeology
Historical Research Nicholas Jackson.
iv Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
1 INTRODUCTION.
1.1 Background.
This report was commissioned by Hector Abrahams, Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners on 18 May 2012.
This report forms part of the Comparative Heritage Study of the Nineteenth Century Rural Homestead Complexes of the Hunter Region, commissioned by the Office of the Environment and Heritage in 2012.
1.2 Brief.
The purpose of this report is to provide the results of an historical archaeological desktop survey of the nineteenth century homesteads of the Hunter Region. The report seeks to: 1. Assess the extent of the archaeological resource. 2. Undertake a desktop survey of the previously listed sites to determine condition and integrity. 3. Assess factors affecting protection, conservation and viability. 4. Determine priorities for heritage listing on the State Heritage Register.
1.3 Location of site.
The study area comprises twelve local government areas (Figure 1.1). The area includes three regions, namely the Lower Hunter (Port Stephens, Maitland, Newcastle, Cessnock and Lake Macquarie Councils), the Upper Hunter (Dungog, Singleton, Muswellbrook and Upper Hunter Councils) and also the Manning River Regions (Great Lakes, Gloucester and Greater Taree Councils).
All councils have Local Environment Plans (LEP), although the Upper Hunter Council has three LEPs relating to the now amalgamated councils of Merriwa, Murrurundi and Scone.
1.4 Heritage Listings.
The heritage listings that form the basis of this study have been compiled into a database by Kate Denny, Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners.1
1 Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners, 2012. Homestead Database.
1 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
The direct antecedent to this database was prepared by Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd (GML) in 2010 and forms part of the Wambo Homestead Complex Heritage Strategy.2
1.5 Study methodology and limitations.
This report has been prepared in accordance with standard guidelines.3
The report is confined to a desktop survey and does not include the site survey of the properties on the ground.
The report relies upon the database of homesteads provided by Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners. Funding has not allowed the author to inspect the original listings that comprise this database.4
The desktop survey has revealed that the address and cadastral information for a significant number of the listings have changed, including street numbering and road name, lot and deposited plan numbers. In a small number of cases, the address information provided with the original listing has been insufficient to re-locate these properties or has caused mis-identification. Further research is required.
This report relies upon the historical documentation gathered by Nicholas Jackson for Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners. Funding has allowed for little additional historical research, except for the maps and plans described in Chapter 2. The Subdivision Plans, from the State Library of New South Wales, have also been a useful resource.
2 Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd. 2010. Wambo Homestead Complex Heritage Strategy. Wambo Coal Pty Ltd. 3 Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. Statements of Heritage Impact. Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. Conservation Management Documents. Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. NSW Heritage Manual. Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. Archaeological assessment Guidelines. Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. Heritage Assessments. NSW Heritage Office. 2000. Assessing Heritage Significance. A NSW Heritage Manual Update. J. S. Kerr’s The Conservation Plan. The ICOMOS Burra Charter. 4 Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners, 2012. Homestead Database.
2 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
No funding has been available for a search of archaeological reports on Hunter Valley Homesteads, other than those reports provided by Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners or Dominic Steele.
1.6 Author identification.
This report was prepared by Dr. Edward Higginbotham.
3 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 1.1. The Study Area comprising the twelve local government areas of Greater Taree, Great Lakes, Port Stephens, Gloucester, Dungog, Upper Hunter, Muswellbrook, Singleton, Maitland, Cessnock, Newcastle and Lake Macquarie. Source. Office of Environment and Heritage.
4 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
2 THE EXTENT OF THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESOURCE.
2.1 Methodology.
Previous studies have relied on listings and databases prepared for local and regional heritage studies. They have emphasised the listing of good surviving examples of homesteads, farms and outbuildings. They have often been prepared with an emphasis on architectural and historical qualities.
In contrast, the archaeological approach should seek first to identify the total extent of the archaeological resource to answer a series of research questions. What was the total number of homesteads and farms in the study area in the nineteenth century? How many of these survive and in what condition?
2.2 Definition of a Nineteenth Century Rural Homestead Complex.
Before proceeding to identify the archaeological resource, it is necessary to define the criteria used to describe that resource. What is a "nineteenth century rural homestead complex"?
In their comparative study of Wambo Homestead, Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd defined the homestead complex as follows:
"…a homestead complex of an owner engaged in pastoral-based activities (compared to town or company pursuits) with various early outbuildings. In some examples, the residences will have been altered or replaced by later owners/development, in others, the outbuildings have been renewed."5
For the purposes of identifying the archaeological resource, the following additional criteria have been used: 1. Land grants generally comprising more than 640 acres (1 square mile. 258.99 hectares), although in practise this has been reduced to 500 acres (202.34 hectares) in cases where the land grant is conjoined to other land grants in the same ownership. 2. Land granted in most cases prior to the end of convict transportation in 1840, but extending through the 1840s to early 1850s, before the onset of closer settlement from the 1850s onwards. 3. Land located within the Settled Districts. 4. Landholders involved in "pastoral or agricultural pursuits".
5 Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd. 2010: 51.
5 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
The following properties have been excluded: 1. Land outside the Limits of Location. 2. Town and Suburban Allotments. 3. Village Reserves. 4. Church and School land. 5. Australian Agricultural Company land.
2.3 Historical sources for mapping the archaeological resource.
A series of historical maps has been used to identify the archaeological resource, including: 1. Dixon's Map of the Colony of New South Wales, 1837.6 2. William Baker. Baker’s Australian County Atlas, 1843-1846.7 3. County Maps. 4. Parish Maps. Both Dixon's Map and Baker's Atlas show the extent of rural settlement towards the end of convict transportation in 1840. The County Maps are taken as the most reliable source for the name of the grantee, though some editions do not include grantee names. Reference has then been made to Parish Maps for the Grantee name.
The rapid nature of the settlement of the Hunter Region can be gauged from the comparison of various earlier maps, beginning with R. Penny's 1820 Map of New South Wales, which shows the complete isolation of Newcastle (Port Hunter) from the Settled Districts.8 Joseph Cross' Map of the Hunter River , in 1828 shows the dramatic expansion in rural settlement within the first eight years of the 1820s.9
6 Robert Dixon. 1837. ‘This Map of the Colony of New South Wales Exhibiting the Situation and Extent of The Appropriated Lands, including the Counties, Towns, Village Reserves, Etc, Compiled from Authentic Surveys etc is respectfully dedicated to Sir John Barrow Bart, President of the Royal Geographic Society Etc Etc Etc Etc, by His Obliged Humble Servant Robert Dixon. Engraved by J. & C. Walker. SR Map 4617. 7 William Baker. Baker’s Australian County Atlas. Dedicated by permission to Sir T. L. Mitchell, Surveyor General of New South Wales, Showing the Various Parishes, Grants, Townships Purchases and Unlocated Lands. Sydney, Printed and Published by William Baker, Hiberni[an] Press King Street East. 1843-1846. National Library of Australia. Map RaA 8. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-raa8 8 “Map of New South Wales…”, by R. Penny, published in W. C. Wentworth. Statistical, historical, and political description of the colony of New South Wales, Second Edition, 1820. Source. National Library of Australia. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-f864-e 9 “Map of the Hunter River…”, engraved by Joseph Cross, London, 1828. Source. National Library of Australia http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-nk646-e
6 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
2.4 The identification of individual properties.
In order to identify the total number of homesteads and farms in the study area in the nineteenth century, portions held by individual landholders have been combined into single properties, where land grants are contiguous (even corner to corner). Where land grants are not contiguous, they have been separated into individual farms. In most cases grantees with the same surname have been combined, even if initials are different. Further research is required to determine if these landholdings were treated as single enterprises or farms in the historical context.
The results of the analysis were plotted onto the modern cadastre for each of the twelve local governments in the study area (See Appendix 1). The following table summarises the results:
LGA Properties Properties Other CLSP Notes. 10,000 ac 2560 ac properties Database plus plus, up to 10,000 ac Greater 12 121 Taree Great lakes 0 1 0 6 Excluding AAC Port 0 7 61 31 Excluding Stephens AAC Gloucester 0 0 0 6 Excluding AAC Dungog 3 23 57 39 Upper Hunter 5 43 115 44 Muswellbrook 1 17 46 20 Singleton 3 20 113 34 Maitland 0 3 54 23 Cessnock 0 3 65 8 Newcastle 0 2 18 0 Lake 12 72 Macquarie Totals 14 123 548 685 214
The table shows that a total of 685 properties have been identified in the Study Area. They comprise at least 14 properties of 10,000 acres (4,046.86 hectares) or more, 123 properties of 2,560 (1,035.99 hectares) acres or more (but less than 10,000 acres) and 548 other properties, ranging from around 500 acres (202.34 hectares) up to less than 2,560 acres.
How can the total of 685 properties as the complete archaeological resource be correlated with the 214 listings in the CLSP Homesteads Database?
7 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Furthermore, how can this total of 685 properties be reconciled with the total identified by Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd of 554 listings of nineteenth century homestead complexes established pre 1900 in New South Wales as a whole? Out of this database, they identified only 78 Hunter Region Homestead Complexes established pre 1850 and a further 137 established between 1850 and 1900, making a total of 215 sites.
The GML Homestead Database does not restrict itself to rural properties, but also includes some on town or suburban allotments and small portions. The CLSP Homestead Database excludes all but rural properties, but with additional research has brought the number of rural properties to a total of 214 sites.
There are a number of potential reasons that can be used to explain why the total extent of the archaeological resource cannot be reconciled with the total number of listings, including: 1. The existing heritage listings only record those homesteads that survive intact or in a state sufficient to recognise architectural or historical characteristics of significance. 2. A number of surviving homestead complexes have not been listed, but have been overlooked. 3. A substantial proportion of the original homestead complexes have not survived. 4. The methodology used to identify the archaeological resource is incorrect.
It is highly likely that all of these factors have played a varying role in the lack of correlation between the listings and the archaeological resource. However given the high level of professional expertise brought to bear on the heritage listing of properties in the Hunter Region over the last 30-40 years, it is unlikely than many properties have been overlooked. There is also a high level of correlation on a property-by-property basis between the archaeological resource and the household returns of the 1841 Census, confirming the archaeological methodology used.
Thus the most likely factor for the lack of correlation is the high rate of loss of historical buildings.
The archaeological resource may survive in a number of forms, including buildings and structures, then ruins and finally as below ground archaeological sites.
The lack of correlation between the listings and the archaeological resource may reflect a worst-case scenario, in which less than a third of the original homestead complexes survive as standing buildings or as ruins (31.38%).
8 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
It is assumed that a higher proportion of homestead sites survive as below ground archaeological sites, but that assumption should be tested through a separate study to assess the remaining 471 sites not already included as listings.10
The worst-case scenario may have another explanation, relating to our understanding of settlement types, settlement hierarchies and the evolution of settlement types (see Chapter 3).
10 The analysis of sites not already listed is outside the scope of this study.
9 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
2.5 Figures.
Figure 2.1. “Map of New South Wales…”, by R. Penny, published in W. C. Wentworth. Statistical, historical, and political description of the colony of New South Wales, Second Edition, 1820. Source. National Library of Australia. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-f864-e This map of New South Wales shows the isolation of Newcastle (Port Hunter) from the settled districts. This is in complete contrast to the extent of settlement by 1828 shown in Figure 2.2).
10 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 2.2. “Map of the Hunter River…”, engraved by Joseph Cross, London, 1828. Source. National Library of Australia. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-nk646-e By 1828 free settlement had reached nearly the full extent of the Hunter Valley. Ships and steamers with supplies for the settlers bypassed Newcastle and went as far as the head of navigation on the river. For shallow draft vessels the upper reaches were located at Maitland, but for larger vessels Morpeth became the head of navigation. This focus of trade also made Maitland the centre of government for the Hunter until the construction of the railway in 1857.
11 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 2.3. Detail of Dixon’s Map of NSW, 1837, showing the extent of settlement in the Study Area, comprising the Counties of Macquarie, Gloucester, Durham, Brisbane, Bligh, Phillip, Hunter and Northumberland. Source. Robert Dixon. 1837. ‘This Map of the Colony of New South Wales Exhibiting the Situation and Extent of The Appropriated Lands, including the Counties, Towns, Village Reserves, Etc, Compiled from Authentic Surveys etc is respectfully dedicated to Sir John Barrow Bart, President of the Royal Geographic Society Etc Etc Etc Etc, by His Obliged Humble Servant Robert Dixon. Engraved by J. & C. Walker. SR Map 4617.
12 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 2.4. Map of the County of Durham, showing the extent of land alienated from the Crown, together with roads, towns and villages. Source. William Baker. Baker’s Australian County Atlas. Dedicated by permission to Sir T. L. Mitchell, Surveyor General of New South Wales, Showing the Various Parishes, Grants, Townships Purchases and Unlocated Lands. Sydney, Printed and Published by William Baker, Hiberni[an] Press King Street East. 1843-1846. National Library of Australia. Map RaA 8. http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-raa8
13 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 2.5. Map of the County of Durham, detail, showing the names of grantees and properties, for land granted prior to the 1850s. Source. http://images.maps.nsw.gov.au/pixel.htm
14 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3 THE CHARACTERISTICS OF RURAL SETTLEMENT IN THE HUNTER REGION.
Chapter 2 sought to answer two important questions. What was the total number of homesteads and farms in the study area in the nineteenth century? How many of these survive and in what condition? It found that there were 685 properties forming the total archaeological resource, but suggested a worst-case scenario in which less than a third of this resource survived as standing buildings or ruins.
Although this worst-case scenario is initially hard to accept, a plausible explanation is found in an understanding of settlement types, settlement hierarchies and the evolution of settlement types.
In this chapter the following archaeological research questions are investigated among others. What was the settlement pattern associated with the Hunter Region homesteads? What settlement types can be observed? What settlement hierarchies can be observed? Can sample bias be recognised in the archaeological resource? How does the evolution of the homestead complex throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries affect this archaeological resource? What are the principal improvements found on homestead complexes?
3.1 Distribution of rural settlement within the Settled Districts.
An initial glance at any historical map showing the distribution of rural settlement in the first half of the nineteenth century in the Settled Districts of New South Wales will demonstrate very clearly that it was highly selective or patterned (Figure 2.3). There are vast tracts of land, which have not been alienated from the Crown and which remain unsettled to this day. The settlers primarily avoided the Hawkesbury Sandstone and generalised slopes of more than 8 degrees.11
Preference was then given to access to water, alluvial soils and gravels, and land only lightly timbered. These preferences characterise the large-scale pastoral settlement of the settled districts until the closer settlement of the 1850s and later nineteenth century. Unfortunately it was this same land that was occupied by the greatest concentrations of native Aboriginal populations, causing inevitable conflict and displacement.12
11 Jeans, D. N. 1972. An Historical Geography of New South Wales to 1901. Reed Publications. Artarmon, Sydney. 12 Higginbotham, E. 1994. ‘The historical archaeology of rural settlement in the South Western Districts of New South Wales’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney. Volume 1: 6.
15 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
The assessment of the homestead complexes in the Hunter Region reveals how the land along major rivers and watercourses was selected very early in the 1820s, to the detriment of later settlers and small farmers.
The homesteads that survive today are primarily located above the flood prone land, but adjacent to the alluvial soils that were ideal for cultivation paddocks. This fixed relationship between the homestead and the alluvial soils demonstrates the importance given to access to water and the proximity to cultivated land, resulting in the investment of substantial capital in fixed assets at this prime location, not only housing and farm buildings, but orchards, annual and perennial crops. These were fixed assets in contrast to the four-legged moveable assets that roamed the grassed paddocks that stretched back and away from the watercourses.
3.2 Historical settlement typologies.
A document like the New South Wales Calendar and General Post Office Directory, 1832 will quickly reveal the contemporary terminology used by the local population to describe the different types of rural settlement.13 In the description of the Great North Road from Wiseman's to the extremities of settlement on the Liverpool Plains, the various landholdings are described as follows: 1. Small Farms and Settlers. 2. Stations. 3. Farms. 4. Estates. 5. Farms for Veterans. 6. Large Farming Establishments. 7. Residences. 8. Sheep Runs. This selection of terminology shows the distinction made between small and large farms and between settlers with limited or extensive means. The terms "small farm" and "farms for veterans" are used to describe specific small farms that can be equated with land grants of less than 640 acres.
In contrast the terms, "estate" and "residence" are limited to the larger landholders. These term "residence" is limited to the main residences of the larger landholders, but the term "estate" is less indicative of a resident owner. The term "station" is normally used to define a landholding, which is managed on behalf of an owner living elsewhere. For this reason the landholdings on the Liverpool Plains were all termed "stations" in the PO Directory of 1832.
13 New South Wales Calendar and General Post Office Directory, 1832. Sydney. Facsimile Edition published by the Public Library of NSW, 1966.
16 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
The PO Directory also uses the term "sheep run" to refer to the use of a particular large landholding, though one might also expect to see the term used to describe runs on Crown land, both within and without the Limits of Location.
The above differentiation in terminology is also reflected in the households and settlement types that can be reconstructed from the 1828 Census.14
Settlement Group 1. Alienated Land. Settlement Types: Main Residence Main Residence of Other Family Member Managed Station or Farm Other Residence
Settlement Group 2. Crown Land. Settlement Types: Run on Crown Land Run on Crown Land, Managed Run on Crown Land, by Stockholder
Settlement Group 3. Other Income. Settlement Types: Innkeeping Lodgings Place of Work Tenant
Ungrouped Settlement Types Settlement Types: Duplicate Land and Stock Held by Employee Land and Stock Held by Partner Unidentified
Of the above settlement types, the following are of particular relevance to the study of Hunter Region homesteads. 1. Main Residence 2. Main Residence of Other Family Member 3. Managed Station or Farm, and 4. Run on Crown Land. The settlement types correlate with the terms "estates", "residences", "stations" and "runs" that are used in the 1832 PO Directory.
14 Edward Higginbotham. 1993. 'The 1828 Census and the analysis of rural settlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 52-75.
17 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3.3 Settlement hierarchies.
The 1828 Census also clearly reveals that many larger landholders possessed a series of settlement types. Typically a single landholder might possess a main residence, a managed station or farm, but also one or more runs on alienated or Crown land. The chain-of-settlement pattern from the settled districts out beyond the Limits of Location is well documented particularly from the 1820s and 1830s onwards. Examples include James Hale of Wambo, who possessed a string of properties up into New England.15 The Dumaresq family at Muswellbrook, Scone and Saumarez in New England provide another example.
Historical maps have been used to reconstruct the settlement pattern of the Hunter Region up to the 1840s, locating 685 properties. Research has already indicated that improvements can be expected on each of the three main settlement types. The extent of improvements will depend on the place each property holds in the hierarchy of settlement types of each landholder. The land grants occupied as main residences possess the most improvements and the highest level of capital investment. Those occupied as managed stations or farms had more utilitarian improvements, while runs on alienated or Crown land mostly possessed only a hut and stockyards or pens.16
The usage of Lyndhurst Vale in 1830 as a run on alienated land is illustrated by a plan showing only "Verge's Hut" without any other improvements on the property. Brookfield, the adjacent property to the south, is similarly only shown with one hut and may have been used for the same purpose (Figure 3.1).17
An understanding of settlement hierarchies among the properties in the Hunter Region now begins to provide a partial explanation for the lack of correlation between the archaeological resource of 684 sites and the 214 listed properties.
3.4 Sample Bias.
Sample bias is present within the surviving evidence for rural settlement, not just for the Hunter Region, but also for all the Settled Districts of New South Wales, particularly for the period up to the 1850s.
Sample bias may be described as the differential rates of survival of settlement types and the buildings each possess. Over time, the cumulative effect of these processes
15 Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd. 2010: 57. 16 Edward Higginbotham. 1993. 'The 1828 Census and the analysis of rural settlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 52-75. 17 Survey of Williams River. G B White. 1830. Mitchell Library, State Library of NSW. Z M2 811.24/1830/1
18 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154. will result in the survival of a highly biased sample, which is not representative of the historical settlement pattern.
Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd, in their report on Wambo Homestead recognise some of the causes for the depletion of the archaeological record in recent years:
"…in the 28 years that have elapsed, much of the rich heritage Sheedy observed has disappeared—by fire, flood, neglect, demolition, urban and industrial development."18
The survival of historical buildings on homestead complexes, stations and runs depends on the continued investment of capital in maintenance and improvement. Reasons for a cessation of capital input include the redundancy of buildings as labour and technology requirements change or with subdivision or amalgamation of land. The personal and financial circumstances of the landowners may also result in a lack of capital to fund maintenance and improvements.
Given the variation in the level and continuity of capital invested in main residences, stations or runs, sample bias in the current listings can be easily demonstrated.
All the current heritage listings for rural properties relate to main residences. None relates to stations or runs. These two statements clearly need to be tested against the heritage listings themselves, but if found to be true, reveal the heavy weight of sample bias on the surviving archaeological resource. Sample bias against certain settlement types therefore becomes part of the explanation for the lack of correlation with the surviving heritage listings.
Not only is there sample bias in the surviving settlement hierarchy, but it is also active within each property. It is obvious in the better survival of brick and masonry buildings over timber structures. It is also an important factor in the poor survival of convict accommodation, both mens' huts and convict barracks, when they became redundant in the 1840s. They were replaced by better quality cottages to ensure that the waged employees were retained; Tocal provides an excellent example of this process of change.19
3.5 Correcting the bias in the surviving evidence.
If we are to gain a better understanding of the historical settlement pattern, sample bias should be countered. We should take action to restore the evidence to a balanced and representative state.
18 Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd. 2010: 45. 19 Brian Walsh. Voices from Tocal: convict life on a rural estate. CB Alexander Foundation. Tocal. 2008.
19 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Since the current heritage listings represent only the main residences, the archaeological resource should be addressed to provide an equal sample of the former stations and runs, the other components of the settlement hierarchy.
Since this study is limited to the review of the current heritage listings, the assessment of the 471 other sites identified as the archaeological resource is beyond the scope of work that can be undertaken at present. Nonetheless among the existing listings are a number of archaeological sites. Again they are all examples of main residences.
Although the extent of historical research for each property has been limited by the large extent of the study area and the numbers of sites requiring attention, nonetheless historical documentation is already available to highlight at least the run on alienated or Crown land settlement type. Examples include "Verge's Hut" and the hut on Brookfield, already mentioned. Various place names, like Sheep Station Creek, may refer to the location of a run on Crown land. Surveyor's Field Books have been used in previous studies to locate the huts and yards associated with cattle or sheep runs on Crown land.20 In one important instance, the 1885 subdivision plan for St. Hilliers, near Muswellbrook and Aberdeen, shows the combination of a hut and sheepyard at two locations on the property, at least 3 miles (4.8 kilometres) from the homestead.21 This document gives an indication of what must have been a common practice on the larger properties, particularly in the period of convict transportation up to 1840 and before the advent of wire fences in the 1860s onwards.
Other property or subdivision plans reveal that many homestead complexes had a broader range of outbuildings than survives today. Examples include Bona Vista, Bellevue, Elmswood, Glendon, Glen Livet and St Aubins. On the latter property, the homestead is located to the south of Scone, but the associated Shearing Shed and Houses (Shearers' Quarters?) are located at the other extreme of the estate at Parkville. The shearing shed no longer survives (Figure 3.2). On Glendon, a plan dated to 1856 shows the location of two rows of mens' huts and other buildings that are no longer extant (Figure 3.3). They are probably buildings that were used previously for convict accommodation.
The archaeological sites of homesteads are also revealed by subdivision plans or other plans included in title documents. Examples include Boorara, Cardoress, Kirkton and Louth Park (Figure 3.4).
20 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. Goulburn Mulwaree Archaeological Management Plan. 2010. Volume 2: 7. 21 Mitchell Library Subdivision Plans. The Hall Estate. St Hilliers. 1885.
20 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3.6 The evolution of the homestead complex and "Settlement Type Dynamics".
"Settlement types therefore change with the evolution or development of properties by landholders. For example a run may become a managed station or farm, a managed station or farm may become a main residence, or a main residence may become a tenant settlement type. Changes from one settlement type to another reveal significant stages in the development of economic strategies by landholders."22
"Settlement Type Dynamics" play an important role, not only in the historical settlement pattern, but also in the surviving heritage listings. Properties evolved during the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. As stations and runs were converted or evolved into main residences, so a homestead would be built, together with its associated improvements. From the current heritage listings it is clear that the first homesteads on a number of properties were therefore constructed after the end of convict transportation in the 1840s. In other instances it is suggested that landholdings never became main residences, never possessed a homestead complex. For example Lyndhurst Vale was a run in the 1830s. The subdivision plan, dated to 1917, shows the pre-existing settlement nodes or nuclei, but does not indicate the location of a homestead. Was this run converted into leasehold farms rather than a homestead complex? What effect does this have on the surviving heritage sites on the property? What significance should tenant farms be given in the context of the evolution of large landholdings?
We have already seen how a number of distinct settlement types can be found on one property. St Hilliers in 1885 had not only a main residence at the homestead, but also at least two sheep runs on the far reaches of the land. Likewise a significant number of subdivision plans for the properties in the study area show not only the main homestead, but also a number of other buildings, cottages, houses and related outbuildings. Examples include Lyndhust Vale, Osterley, Overton, Penshurst, Piercefield, Redbourneberry, Rosebank, Rosebrook (near Maitland), St Clair and Woodville.
The plans for Penshurst reveal the nature of much of this development of the larger estates, namely the leasing of small farms to settlers. For small farmers, leasehold property on good alluvial soil was a better alternative to conditional purchase on land that was only useful for grazing of cattle and sheep, or alternatively heavily timbered.
These same subdivision plans also sometimes reveal the historical context of the leaseholds as part of the expansion of dairy farming in the second half of the
22 Edward Higginbotham. 1993. 'The 1828 Census and the analysis of rural settlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 63.
21 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154. nineteenth century. Other examples include piggeries (Penshurst) and tobacco production (Merton).
Thus on the same land as a main residence or homestead, there are ample examples of the Tenant Settlement Type; leasehold farms therefore form a significant part of the settlement pattern associated with homestead complexes. The bias of the current listings towards the main homesteads should also be balanced by the listing of what were former leasehold properties on the same landholdings. Do leasehold farms buildings survive? This question should again be resolved by analysis of the existing heritage listings, but also through thorough analysis of the remaining archaeological resource.
Other examples of two or more settlement types on one original land grant or combined holding may be found among the current heritage listings. Examples include Dalwood House and Leconfield, or Castle Forbes and Baroona. Another interesting combination is provided by Berry Park, Berry House and Duckenfield. Further afield at Muswellbrook, Edinglassie, Rous Lench, Balmoral and Skellater are all located on the one combined landholding of Francis Forbes. At Allynbrook and East Gresford, Caegrwle, Maryville and Cam Yr Allyn are all located on what appears to be one large landholding, as are Lewinsbrook and Bingleburra and the adjacent Bingleburra Park. Further research is required to elucidate the historical context of these multiple homesteads or residences on the one landholding, but the study of the 1828 Census has already revealed how family members and other related persons were housed on single landholdings (Main Residence of Other Family Member Settlement Type).
Where multiple settlement types are located on the one landholding, it is important, first, that the relationships to the main homestead complex are recognised and, second, that the associated properties are given appropriate representation during heritage listing.
3.7 Curtilages and archaeological assessment.
The distribution of settlement types on individual land grants or holdings has a twofold affect on not only curtilages, but also the methodology for archaeological assessment. Only a basic level of desktop investigation or a baseline archaeological assessment has been completed for each heritage listing for Hunter Region homestead complexes in this study.
A more thorough archaeological assessment of each property should be based first of all on detailed historical research of primary and secondary sources. An essential element of this research is the elucidation of the economic strategy utilised by the individual landowner, so that the settlement types on the property can be readily
22 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154. identified. Failure to identify settlement types correctly will lead to misinterpretation of the archaeological evidence and a misunderstanding of the heritage item.
Although most settlement on historical land grants was located at one or more settlement nodes or nuclei, the evidence already discussed reveals that certain settlement types will be located at a distance from the main residence. Examples include sheep and cattle runs, but also other residences and farm buildings. Items like water mills also had different location requirements in contrast to homesteads.
A significant proportion of current heritage listings has concentrated on the homestead itself and failed to list the associated outbuildings. This is sometimes understandable when the outbuildings are more recent, but fails to take into account the possible archaeological resources for outbuildings and other structures that may survive.
The investigation of the archaeological resource indicates that the primary curtilage should be the boundaries of the original land grant or combined landholding. Only after detailed archaeological assessment should this curtilage be reduced to protect the homestead complexes and other archaeological sites identified on a property.
3.8 Principal improvements found on homestead complexes.
As part of his thesis on rural settlement, Dr. Edward Higginbotham examined the limited historical references to improvements on main residences in the South Western Districts to be found in the Colonial Secretary Correspondence Regarding Land, held by the Archives Office of New South Wales.23 Although this research related to large homesteads in the South Western Districts, nonetheless it is still applicable to other homesteads in the Settled Districts of New South Wales for the period up to the 1850s.
In the 43 examples of main residences in rural situations, substantial variation was exhibited, but the evidence revealed a relatively common grouping of buildings and other improvements, including a house, fencing, barn, men's huts, stable, outbuildings, dairy and stockyards. Other buildings, which were not so frequently mentioned, included granaries, kitchens, mills, stores and sheep sheds. Each of the following structures received a single mention: coach(house), cowyard, ditching, dockyard, forge, milking yard, piggeries, school house, shed, water holes, watermill and workshop.
23 Higginbotham, E. 1994. ‘The historical archaeology of rural settlement in the South Western Districts of New South Wales’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney. Volume 1. Chapter 5.
23 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Improvements. Total Frequency number (%). Dwelling, house, cottage or hut 40 93.02 Fencing 25 58.14 Barn 16 37.21 Stable 10 23.26 Mens or servants huts, or barracks 9 20.93 Outbuildings, outhouses, offices. 8 18.60 Dairy 8 18.60 Stockyard 5 11.63 Granary 4 9.30 Kitchen 2 4.65 Mill 2 4.65 Sheep shed 2 4.65 Store 2 4.65 Coach(house) 1 2.33 Cowyard 1 2.33 Ditching 1 2.33 Dockyard 1 2.33 Forge 1 2.33 Milking yard 1 2.33 Piggery 1 2.33 School house 1 2.33 Shed 1 2.33 Water holes or tanks 1 2.33 Watermill 1 2.33 Workshop 1 2.3324
The above inventory of improvements can be compared and contrasted with the survey of fifty-one homestead complexes in the Goulburn-Mulwaree local government area in 2009-2010.25
This survey again revealed the predominance of the homestead itself, ranging in style from what was termed vernacular with a British regional derivation, through Georgian and Victorian to modern, comprising a wide range of building materials. Attached to the main house were servants' quarters, kitchen wings and nearby detached kitchens. Following close behind were the various workers cottages, managers cottages, mens' huts and shearers' quarters.
The most prominent farm buildings included barns, stables, coachhouses, woolsheds or shearing sheds, wool washeries, granaries, blacksmith's shops, dairies and meat sheds, as well as flourmills. One property also possessed a gate lodge.
24 Edward Higginbotham. 1993. 'The 1828 Census and the analysis of rural settlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 69. 25 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. Goulburn Mulwaree Archaeological Management Plan. Goulburn Mulwaree Council. December 2010. Volume 2: 26ff.
24 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
The Goulburn-Mulwaree survey also revealed some very important findings. Among the survey of homesteads, the surviving houses represented up to a fifth rebuild of a main residence. The original house was only present on eight properties, but a second house had survived in ten examples.
Another important finding was the near absence of convict accommodation. No convict barracks were located, though one slab hut may have survived from an early period and represents the standard type of accommodation occupied by men or convicts (Lockyersleigh).
Another distinct feature was the presence of gaols on some of the properties owned by magistrates. The best example survives on Reevesdale, but relates to the magistrate at Inverary Park. Other examples have been possibly identified at Lansdowne and Rossiville. Other forms of confinement, simply represented by iron bars on windows for cellars or storerooms, are in fact for the safekeeping of stores, rather than confinement.
3.9 Table. Survey of improvements on 51 homestead complexes in the Goulburn Mulwaree LGA, 2009-2010.
Source. Goulburn Mulwaree AMP, 2010.26
Main categories, buildings, structures, Number of sites with these items. features. 1. Main building or structures. Chapel. 4 Cemetery. 6 House. 40 Hotel. 5 Manager’s House. 2 Public School. 1 Private Village 3 House – Stage 1 8 House – Stage 2 10 House – Stage 3 3 House – Stage 4 3 House – Stage 5 2 Farm – Vernacular – Regional British 2 derivation. Cottage – Vernacular. 14 Colonial Georgian 8 Georgian. 13 Victorian. 7 Victorian Italianate. 2
26 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. Goulburn Mulwaree Archaeological Management Plan. Goulburn Mulwaree Council. December 2010. Volume 2: 26ff.
25 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Federation. 1 Californian Bungalow. 1 20th Century. 1 Brick. 8 Brick or stone 1 Stone. Stone rubble. 11 Stone, dressed. 5 Render 7 Slab. 2 Weatherboard. 3 Lath and Plaster. 1 Pise. 1 Other buildings. 1 Detached kitchen. 2 Kitchen wing. 10 Servant’s Quarters. 5 2. Description - Other Buildings. 2a. Staff housing. Cottage 4 Worker’s cottage. 10 Hut. 3 Men’s hut. 1 Shearers’ quarters. 4 (not all recorded) 2b. Main farm buildings Barn. 13 Barn and Stable. 1 Stable. 8 Coachhouse. 4 Coachhouse and Stable. 8 Saddlery and tack room. 1 (not all recorded). Ballroom. 1 Woolshed. 4 (not all may have been recognised). Shearing shed. 6 (not all recorded). Wool washery. 2 Shed for merino rams. 1 Granary. 2 (not all may have been identified). Granary and flour store. 1 Gatelodge. 1 Weighbridge. 1 Chicken shed. 1 (not all may have been recorded) Shed. 3 Outbuildings. 19 Sandstone gateposts. 1 2c. The trades. Blacksmith’s shop or smithy. 6 Workshops for other trades. 1 2d. Mills. Windmill. 1 (site of) Horse powered mill. 1 Millstones, grindstones. 1 Milling equipment and grindstones in situ. 1
26 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Associated machinery and equipment in situ. 1 2e. Food preservation and production. Dairy or cool room. 5 Meat Shed. 5 Building complex – cider making. 1 Honey house 1 2f. Other domestic duties. Laundry. 1 (site of) 2g. Religion and education. Jewish Synagogue. 1 Schoolhouse. 1 (not all may have been recognised). 2h. Methods of water conservation. Water trough. 1 (not all may have been recorded). Well. 2 (not all may have been recorded). Water tank. 1 (not all may have been recorded). Cistern. 1 (not all may have been recorded). Dam. 1 (not all may have been recorded). Dam and causeway. 1 (not all may have been recorded). 2i. Industrial sites. Limestone quarry. 1 Lime kiln. 1 Brick kilns 1 2k. Agriculture or stock control.27 Paddocks – fenced, as indicated on historical 3 plans. Historical documentation or aerial 3 (sample only). photographic evidence 2m. Communications. Bridge abutments. 1 2n. The great pastimes. Racecourses. 2 Grandstands. 1 Grandstands, raided earthen banks. 1 Armoury – guns for hunting. 1 3. Penal System. Gaol 3 Other place of confinement - cellar 1 Other place of confinement - storeroom 2 4. Layout and Landscape. Courtyard layout of house and outbuildings. 4 (surviving buildings may not reveal original layout in some cases). Rectilinear Farm Layout, often around fenced 11 and tree lined enclosures. Exotic Plantings. 36 Formal gardens. 13 Pastoral Landscape. 34 Old road routes. 15 (not recorded in every case).
27 Note that category 2j and 2l are avoided, because of easy confusion with 2i and 21 (number).
27 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Grid layout of private villages. 1 (not recorded in every case).
3.10 Property databases.
The richness of the surviving improvements on the homestead complexes in the Goulburn-Mulwaree area indicates that site survey for the Hunter Region would reveal a similar rich heritage. Indeed the current listings for the Hunter Region do exhibit this richness, but as yet it has evaded detailed quantification:
"For each of the items, the database includes brief annotation from desktop information currently available on the architectural components of the sites, their character, age and integrity (where known) and basic history. Not unexpectedly, the data ranged considerably in its age and available detail, particularly in relation to outbuildings, and must be ground truthed. This represents an initial assembly to be refined and updated over time. It should be regarded as a work in progress."28
The desktop baseline archaeological assessment database described in Chapter 4 takes the existing database forward by providing additional quantifiable information on both the houses and outbuildings and enables a selection to be made for site survey and "ground truthing".
28 Godden Mackay Logan Pty Ltd. 2010: 49.
28 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3.11 Figures.
Figure 3.1. Survey of Williams River, G B White, 1830, detail. Source. Mitchell Library. Z M2 811.24/1830/1
The plan shows a single hut ("Verge's Hut") on Lyndhurst Vale and a similar hut on Brookfield to the south, indicating that both were used as runs.
29 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 3.2. Subdivision plan for St. Aubins at Scone, details. Source. Mitchell Library. Subdivision plans. County of Brisbane.
The subdivision plan not only shows the vast size of the landholding, but the different locations of the homestead complex and its shearing shed.
30 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 3.3. Plan of Glendon, by White and Gale, 1856, detail. Source. Mitchell Library. Z M4 811.24/gbbd/1856/1
This plan is unusual in that it reveals the rows of mens' huts beside the homestead. These buildings would have housed the workers on the estate and no doubt the convict workforce prior to the 1840s.
31 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 3.4. Plan of Louth Park, Dodds, 1854, detail. Source. Mitchell Library. Z M2 811.25/1854/2
This plan shows the layout of the homestead and other buildings, none of which survive as standing buildings.
32 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4 THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT OF CURRENT LISTINGS.
4.1 Introduction to assessment methodology.
The CLSP Homestead Database has identified a total of 214 sites. All of these sites were subject to analysis, which included gathering information under a number of headings: 1. Location and Address. 2. Description of House and Outbuildings. 3. Description of Farm Layout and Landscaping. In addition to the database, a series of vertical aerial photographs was gathered for each property, together with supporting historical maps and plans.
The purpose of the baseline archaeological assessment is to: 1. Provide accurate and up to date property information. 2. Confirm the identification of the listed item. 3. Provide quantifiable information on the number of houses, cottages and outbuildings on each property. 4. Assist in the selection of sites for site survey.
The following documentation was used to identify and locate each item. Most mapping is available electronically through the Spatial Information Exchange (SIX):29 1. Lite Maps, providing access to current aerial photography, current topographic maps and current address and title information.30 2. Historical county, parish, village and town maps were used to verify property locations and help identify other properties. They were also used to determine the date of grant, size of grant or status of the land (either portion, town or suburban allotment).31 3. In a small number of cases it was necessary to research parish maps through the Parish Map Preservation Project.32 4. In most cases, except in portions of the Upper Hunter LGA, Google Maps provided the most detailed aerial photography, used in the baseline archaeological assessment.33 5. ML subdivision plans often assisted in locating properties and provided more details on historical improvements.
The baseline archaeological assessment is a desktop analysis and has not been supported by site survey on the ground. While the availability of documentation through the internet has made this type of survey much easier to complete,
29 https://six.maps.nsw.gov.au/wps/portal/ 30 http://lite.maps.nsw.gov.au/ 31 http://images.maps.nsw.gov.au/pixel.htm 32 http://parishmaps.lands.nsw.gov.au/pmap.html 33 https://maps.google.com/
33 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154. nonetheless vertical aerial photography does not compare with the information that can be recorded by site inspection. The desktop analysis has been adapted to provide meaningful information from this resource, but shortcomings include the limited ability to date buildings from their roof style or to ascribe use to the farm buildings. The assessment is therefore intended to provide sufficient information to determine which sites warrant further assessment through site survey.
(Details relating to the format of the database are described in Appendix 2).
4.2 Preliminary selection of sites for archaeological assessment.
Each of the 214 properties identified in the CLSP Homestead Database was subject to an initial assessment. The total number of entries was expanded during this process to a total of 233 listings, in order to allow for more detailed analysis of some individual properties or to suggest alternative sites (see Second Listings below).
However a number of the properties require additional research before assessment, or alternatively could not be located on the information available. Other properties have been excluded from the database on the grounds that they do not comply with the definition of a Hunter Region Homestead Complex, as provided in Chapter 2.2.
A total of 94 properties was therefore excluded from the database and the remaining 139 properties were subject to baseline archaeological assessment. The table below summarises the reasons for exclusion.
Category Number of Properties Australian Agricultural Company 8 Further research required 42 Not located 5 Outside Study Area 3 Outside the Limits of Location 1 Second Listing 16 Small Portions 13 Town or Suburban Allotments 5 Village Reserves 1 Total excluded from baseline 94 archaeological assessment
Note - Second Listing refers to a second record relating to an existing listing. The quantifiable information is provided in the original listing, but the second listing provides additional information or alternative listings on a particular property.
34 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4.3 Sites requiring further research prior to assessment.
The following 47 properties require further research before they can be assessed:
LGA SHI Name Cessnock 2820008 Abercorn Cessnock 2820004 Caerphilly Dungog 2820046 Fotheringaye - Royston Dungog 2820040 Lyndhurst Vale Dungog 2820029 Mountjove - Mountjoy ? Dungog 2820045 Summer Hill Dungog 2820036 Thalaba Dungog 2820031 Tillegra Dungog 2820021 Trevallyn Gloucester 2820050 Faulkland Lake Macquarie 2820061 Cooranbang Lake Macquarie 2820062 Lymington ? Liverpool Plains 2820191 Warrah - Old Warrah - New Warrah Maitland 2820081 Dunoon Maitland 2820080 Font Hill Maitland 2820076 Regentville Muswellbrook 2820088 Muswellbrook 2820102 Belmont Port Stephens 2820126 Bowthorne Port Stephens 2820128 Doribank Port Stephens 2820130 Eagleton - Engleton Port Stephens 2820132 Hollow Tree Port Stephens 2820115 Irrawang Port Stephens 2820127 Kilcoy Port Stephens 2820122 Kimmerghan Port Stephens 2820129 Leigh Farm Port Stephens 2820133 Motto Port Stephens 2820116 Newton - Tabbra Port Stephens 2820117 Rosebank Port Stephens 2820118 Toombimba Port Stephens 2820125 Tremarton Park Singleton 2820155 Ardersier Singleton 2820141 Arrowfield Singleton 2820167 Bebeah Singleton 2820153 Carrow Brook Singleton 2820166 Clifford Singleton 2820162 Ewbank Singleton 2820165 Frome Singleton 2820163 Greylands Singleton 2820160 Hambledon Hill Singleton 2820168 Spottiswood Singleton 2820158 Strowan Upper Hunter 2820201 Barsham Upper Hunter 2820192 Bloomfield Upper Hunter 2820193 Carrington Park
35 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA SHI Name Upper Hunter 2820187 Dartbrook Upper Hunter 2820213 Gelston
4.4 Results of baseline archaeological assessment.
The baseline archaeological assessment recorded the number of homesteads, attached buildings and outbuildings. It recorded the roof style of the main homestead, visible from aerial photography. It also recorded the layout of the main homestead and its primary farmyard.
In many cases there were a number of other settlement nodes or nuclei on the property, comprising houses, cottages or outbuildings. Some properties had up to 5 settlement nuclei, in addition to the main homestead and primary farmyard. All of the buildings were added into the quantified database for each property.
A number of outbuildings were excluded from the quantified database, including stock shelters, usually associated with pens or yards (modern horse breeding?) and large sheds for modern pig or poultry production.
Finally the nature of landscaping and plantings on each property was recorded, including the presence of mature gardens, mature exotic or native trees, avenues, hedges and windbreaks.
The results of the baseline archaeological assessment allow the database of homestead complexes to be analysed in accordance with three principal criteria: 1. Typology of Sites, namely the numbers of buildings, outbuildings and settlement nuclei. 2. Farm Layout. 3. Plantings and Landscaping.
(Details relating to the format of the database are described in Appendix 2. Preliminary results of the analysis of sites according to the three above criteria are provided in Appendix 3.)
4.5 Provisional List of sites for site inspection.
The three classification criteria described above should not be used to provide a ranking of each property, but should simply be used as a guide in selecting properties for further investigation. The aerial photographic survey provides a general overview of each property and enables the archaeologist or heritage practitioner to select those sites requiring site inspection.
36 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
On this basis, a total of 94 properties has been provisionally selected by the archaeologist for site inspection. This list will be updated by the heritage architect and others prior to site survey. (The list does not include those sites that survive principally as below ground archaeological sites. The latter sites are listed separately below).
LGA SHI Property Name Cessnock 2820006 Laguna House Dungog 2820044 Bingleburra Dungog 2820044 Bingleburra Park Dungog 2820023 Cam Yr Allyn - Camyr Allyn Dungog 2820013 Cangon Dungog 2820024 Cawarra Dungog 2820038 Cory Vale (and Vacy ?) Dungog 2820039 Dingadee Dungog 2820030 Figtree - Lanquoyah Dungog 2820019 Gostwyck Dungog 2820014 Maryville Dungog 2820035 Mulconda Dungog 2820026 Munni - Down Dungog 2820042 Nulla Nulla Dungog 2820022 Penshurst Dungog 2820032 Tillemby - Tillimby - Tillimbi Dungog 2820020 Tocal Dungog 2820009 Torryburn Dungog 2820033 Underbank Estate Dungog 2820011 Wirragulla - Crooks Park - Wilhur Chulla Dungog 2820011 Wirragulla - Crooks Park - Wilhur Chulla Maitland 2820069 Aberglasslyn Maitland 2820079 Anambah Maitland 2820063 Bellevue - see Mindaribba Maitland 2820067 Berry Park Maitland 2820072 Bolwarra Maitland 2820077 Closebourne - see also Illalaung and Morpeth House Maitland 2820065 Dunmore Maitland 2820064 Eelah Maitland 2820068 Kaludah - Lochinvar Maitland 2820063 Mindaribba - see Bellevue Maitland 2820071 Windermere Muswellbrook 2820104 Baerami Muswellbrook 2820105 Balmoral Muswellbrook 2820087 Bengalla Muswellbrook 2820087 Dalmar Stud - Celdon Stud - Pickering Muswellbrook 2820097 Edinglassie - See Rous Lench Muswellbrook 2820090 Martindale Muswellbrook 2820096 Merton Muswellbrook 2820094 Negoa Muswellbrook 2820086 Overton - Overdene Muswellbrook 2820091 Pickering - see alternative listing Muswellbrook 2820089 Piercefield Muswellbrook 2820100 Plashett
37 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA SHI Property Name Muswellbrook 2820095 Randwick Park - Woodlands Stud Muswellbrook 2820092 Rosebrook - Rosehill Stud Muswellbrook 2820098 Rous Lench - See Edinglassie Muswellbrook 2820103 St Hilliers Port Stephens 2820131 Brandon Estate Port Stephens 2820108 Burrowell Port Stephens 2820106 Duninald - see other listing Port Stephens 2820109 Eskdale Port Stephens 2820121 Glen Livett Port Stephens 2820111 Hinton Port Stephens 2820112 Kinross Port Stephens 2820134 Stradbroke Port Stephens 2820107 Wallalong Singleton 2820147 Archerfield Singleton 2820149 Baroona - Rosemount Singleton 2820137 Glendon Singleton 2820150 Greenwood - see also Newington Singleton 2820159 Mount Leonard Singleton 2820148 Neotsfield Singleton 2820138 Ravensworth Singleton 2820157 Redbourneberry Singleton 2820146 Wambo Upper Hunter 2820179 Belltrees Upper Hunter 2820195 Bickham Upper Hunter 2820174 Brindley Park Upper Hunter 2820172 Cassilis Upper Hunter 2820203 Cliffdale Upper Hunter 2820171 Collaroy Upper Hunter 2820205 Cressfield Upper Hunter 2820197 Cuan Upper Hunter 2820214 Cullingral Upper Hunter 2820188 Dalkeith Upper Hunter 2820204 Elmswood Upper Hunter 2820194 Glen Alvon - Glenalvon Upper Hunter 2820206 Grampian Hills Upper Hunter 2820198 Harben Vale Upper Hunter 2820181 Invermein Upper Hunter 2820189 Kelvinside Upper Hunter 2820209 Kingslyn Upper Hunter 2820208 Llangollen Upper Hunter 2820175 Puen Buen Upper Hunter 2820182 Segenhoe Upper Hunter 2820178 St Aubins Upper Hunter 2820173 Terragong Upper Hunter 2820180 Thornthwaite Upper Hunter 2820186 Timor Upper Hunter 2820177 Turanville Upper Hunter 2820210 Waverley Upper Hunter 2820196 Yarrandi Upper Hunter 2820207 Yarrawonga
38 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4.6 Provisional List of Archaeological Sites.
The following sites have been identified specifically as archaeological sites, because they either lack a main house or survive only as ruins or below ground archaeological sites. However it should be noted that all the homestead complexes are archaeological sites and will contain relics and sites of previous buildings.
LGA SHI Property Name Cessnock 2820003 The Wilderness Dungog 2820028 Brookfield - Lowther Park Dungog 2820015 Cardoress Dungog 2820040 Lyndhurst Vale - Verge’s Hut 1830 Maitland 2820067 Duckenfield Maitland 2820074 Louth Park Maitland 2820075 Newington - See also Greenwood Maitland 2820085 Rathluba Muswellbrook 2820103 St Hilliers Port Stephens 2820124 Osterley Park Port Stephens 2820110 Porphyry Point Port Stephens 2820119 Woodville Singleton 2820142 Corinda Singleton 2820143 Kirkton Singleton 2820161 Minimbah - Old Minembah - Singleton Military Area Singleton 2820170 St Clair Upper Hunter 2820093 Kayuga (and Rose Vale Cottage)
4.7 The disturbance of archaeological sites.
The factors leading to a loss of building stock on homestead complexes and associated settlement types have already been discussed in Chapter 3.4.
The baseline archaeological assessment process has also highlighted a number of additional threats to these sites. Aerial photography has revealed the following causes, which may be summed up as changes in land use: 1. Open cut coal mining and potentially mine subsidence. 2. Subdivision of farm properties. 3. Subdivision for urban development. 4. Industrial subdivision. 5. Sewerage treatment plants. 6. Gravel extraction and quarrying. 7. Vineyard development. 8. Dam construction and reservoirs, particularly St Clair. 9. Flood mitigation works, water supply channels. 10. Regional airport.
39 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
11. Horse stud development. 12. Industrial development. 13. Forestry. 14. Defence use, for example Singleton Military Area.
Other causes do not involve a change in land use, but relate to historical and modern agricultural practices: 1. Soil erosion. 2. Ploughing. 3. House renovation, additions and extensions. 4. Garden or other landscaping.
4.8 A note on significance.
The pastoral expansion of the 1820s to the 1840s is a principal feature of the settlement of the Nineteen Counties of New South Wales to the Limits of Location. It was one of the main employers of convict labour. The pastoral settlement pattern had a strong influence on the development of road communications, on the location of towns and villages, as well as other services.
In 2010 a group of eleven penal sites in Australia was inscribed on the World Heritage List.34 This followed on from the listing of the Convict Records of Australia on the Memory of the World Register in 2007.35 But this leaves an imbalance in the assessment of the convict system, since there are few listings for the pastoral workplaces of the assigned convicts.
‘Yarralumla [not its current occupants, but as a historic pastoral station] is just an example of the more general heritage problem of the vanishing landscape of the Assigned Servant. With few identifiable intact material remains, the legacy of the Assigned Servant is long overshadowed by several versions of the Penitentiary System. The historic spectacle of minding sheep, drawing water and hewing of timber lacks the glamour and hiss of cruelty, In this sense, the huts and hovels and pathways of the Assigned Servant have become part of the intangible heritage of Australia.’36
34 UNESCO World Heritage List. http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/1306 35 UNESCO. Memory of the World Register. http://www.unesco.org/new/en/communication-and-information/flagship-project- activities/memory-of-the-world/register/full-list-of-registered-heritage/registered- heritage-page-8/the-convict-records-of-australia/#c186408 36 James Warden, 2009. ‘Canberra, the Lost Convict Landscape’. in Trust News, Volume 1. No 9. August 2009: 5. James Warden was the then Director of the Donald Horne Institute of Cultural Heritage, University of Canberra, ACT.
40 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
This study provides an opportunity to investigate the workplaces of the assigned servants and to restore a balance in our understanding. The convict system was far more ingrained in the settlement of New South Wales than we may now imagine, as revealed not only by the historical documentary records, but also by the homestead complexes of the Hunter Region.
41 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4.9 Figures.
Figure 4.1. Aerial photograph of Cangon, Dungog LGA. Source. Google Maps.
Figure 4.2. Aerial photograph of Torryburn, Dungog LGA. Source. Google Maps.
42 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
Figure 4.3. Aerial photograph of Puen Buen, Upper Hunter LGA. Source. Google Maps.
Figure 4.4. Aerial photograph of St Aubins, Upper Hunter LGA. Source. Google Maps.
43 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
5 RESEARCH QUESTIONS.
The following research questions have been raised and some have been addressed in this report. The further study of these and other research questions has the potential to provide a more detailed and improved understanding of nineteenth century rural homestead complexes in the Hunter Region.
1. What was the total number of homesteads and farms in the study area in the nineteenth century? 2. How many of these survive and in what condition? 3. How can the total of 685 properties as the complete archaeological resource be correlated with the 214 listings in the CLSP Homesteads Database? 4. What was the settlement pattern associated with the Hunter Region homesteads? 5. How did this settlement pattern affect the native Aboriginal population? 6. How did the large-scale pastoral settlement of the Hunter Region affect smaller settlers and individuals with lesser means? How did the latter respond to being locked out of the prime river frontages and the associated highly productive alluvial land? 7. What settlement types can be observed? 8. What improvements are located on each settlement type? 9. What settlement hierarchies can be observed? 10. Can sample bias be recognised in the archaeological resource? 11. How does the evolution of the homestead complex throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries affect this archaeological resource? 12. What range of settlement types can be found on the one landholding? 13. Do leasehold farm buildings survive? 14. How should the range of settlement types be incorporated into the listings for homestead complexes? 15. What are the principal improvements found on homestead complexes? 16. What is the range of variation found on the nineteenth century Hunter Region rural homestead complex, in terms of buildings, layout, landscaping and settlement nuclei?
44 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
6 RECOMMENDATIONS.
There are a number of recommendations that arise out of the discussion and findings of this baseline archaeological assessment report on nineteenth century rural homestead complexes in the Hunter Region.
It is recommended that: 1. An archaeological Management Plan should be completed for all 685 properties identified as the archaeological resource in the Study Area. 2. The archaeological resource should be studied on a council-by-council basis or as a regional study. 3. In the study of the archaeological resource, every effort should be made to identify sample bias and develop strategies to counter its affect on our understanding and knowledge of the settlement pattern associated with Hunter Region homesteads. 4. Since the current heritage listings represent only the main residences, the archaeological resource should be addressed to provide an equal sample of the former stations and runs, as well as the other components of the settlement hierarchy (for example, farm leases by larger landholders to small farmers). 5. Where multiple settlement types are located on the one landholding, it is important, first, that the relationships to the main homestead complex are recognised and, second, that the associated properties are given appropriate representation during heritage listing. 6. Thorough archaeological assessment of each property should be based first of all on detailed historical research of primary and secondary sources. An essential element of this research is the elucidation of the economic strategy followed by the individual landowner, so that the settlement types on the property can be readily identified. Failure to identify settlement types correctly will lead to misinterpretation of the archaeological evidence and a misunderstanding of the heritage items. 7. The investigation of the archaeological resource indicates that the primary curtilage should be the boundaries of the original land grant or combined landholding. Only after detailed archaeological assessment should this curtilage be reduced to protect the homestead complex itself and other archaeological sites identified on a property. 8. Further research should be undertaken to locate and assess the 47 properties for which there is insufficient detail to provide an assessment (see the list in Chapter 4.4). 9. Site inspection should be completed for the 94 properties listed in Chapter 4.5. 10. The 17 archaeological sites identified in Chapter 4.6 should be listed as archaeological sites, as well as heritage items.
45 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
11. All the homestead complexes identified in this study should be listed as archaeological sites, as well as heritage items.
46 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
APPENDIX 1. CADASTRAL MAPS OF EACH LOCAL COUNCIL AREA, SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTIES ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE 1850S.
47 * Sheep Station Creek Outside the Limits of Location
10,000 ac+
AACo
640 or less acres 1280 or less acres less than 2560 acres 10 kms 2560 or more acres 3 Properties of 2560 acres or more. Black - Grantee name 12 other smaller properties Red - + Property Name Number of other portions on Bakers Map, White - other sections but not on County Map. 10 miles GREATER TAREE LGA Not including AACo properties. Gloucester
AACo
Stroud
Booral
* Head of Navigation
Carrington
640 or less acres 1280 or less acres 10 kms less than 2560 acres 2560 or more acres
Black - Grantee name 1 Property of 2560 acres or more. Red - + Property Name 0 other smaller properties 10 miles GREAT LAKES LGA Not including AACo properties.
AACo Grant 312,298 acres
Liverpool Plains * Barry Station
AACo Grant 249,600 acres * Schofields Church Beyond the Limits of Location
10,000 ac+
10,000 ac+
10,000 ac+
10,000 ac+
Casillis Ailsa Scone
? 10,000 ac+ Small Portions Merriwa
45 Properties of 2560 acres or more. 640 or less acres 114 other smaller properties 1280 or less acres Number of other portions on Bakers Map, but not on County Map. less than 2560 acres 10 kms 2560 or more acres
Black - Grantee name Red - + Property Name 10 miles UPPER HUNTER LGA White - other sections 10,000 ac+Muswellbrook
Denman 10,000 ac+
Small Portions
Small Portions
18 Properties of 2560 acres or more. 640 or less acres 47 (4 outside LGA) other smaller properties Number of other portions on Bakers Map, 1280 or less acres but not on County Map. less than 2560 acres 10 kms 2560 or more acres
Black - Grantee name Red - + Property Name 10 miles MUSWELLBROOK LGA White - other sections
640orlessacres 1280 or less acres less than 2560 acres
2560 or more acres
Black - Grantee name Red - + Property Name White - other sections Hinton Morpeth 3 Properties of 2560 acres or more. Small Portions 53 other smaller properties W Maitland Clusters of small portions. E Maitland Small Portions Small Portions
Small Portions
10 kms
10 miles MAITLAND LGA
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
APPENDIX 2. BASELINE ARCHAEOLOGICAL ASSESSMENT. THE FORMAT OF THE DATABASE.
Location and Address.
A number of fields were used to describe the location and address of each item. They are standard fields for recording items on the State Heritage Inventory (SHI). They include: 1. SHI number. 2. Name. 3. Number. 4. Street 5. Suburb 6. State 7. Postcode. 8. Local Government Area. 9. Lot 10. Section. 11. DP number. 12. Portion. 13. Parish. 14. County. 15. Acres. 16. Grantee Surname. 17. Grantee First Name. Additional fields also allow for the recording of multiple lot and DP numbers.
The historical cadastre is an essential element for archaeological assessment, since it is the fundamental historical property unit upon which each homestead complex was located.
All of the address and cadastral information for each listing had to be checked for current validity. It is surprising that addresses and cadastral information have changed in a large proportion of the 214 listings.
Description of House and Outbuildings.
In the initial stages of the baseline archaeological assessment process, an attempt was made to describe the topography of each land grant and the settlement nodes or nuclei within each land grant. This is an essential process in the assessment of each property. It enables an understanding of the status of each settlement nucleus and can assist in the process of identifying an original homestead or later development of the land grant. In some cases it has highlighted the presence of two homesteads on a single land grant, requiring further research to resolve the historical context of the
60 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154. development (for example Dalwood House and Leconfield, or Castle Forbes and Baroona).
After discussion with Hector Abrahams and Kate Denny of Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners, it was decided to refine the recording of each property to numerical or multiple choice values to assist in the comparative evaluation process. This has not resulted in the abandonment of the original evaluation of each land grant, but has allowed the information to be recorded in a more usable manner.
Having completed the evaluation of a sample of properties, the database was therefore reduced to the recording of a number of fields reflecting the potential date of the main house, the extent of outbuildings and the number of settlement nodes or nuclei on each property.
The following fields have been recorded: On House or Garden Block 01. 1. Roof Structure of Main House. 2. House (numerical value for presence or absence). 3. Attached Buildings (numerical value for presence or absence). 4. Cottage (numerical value for presence or absence). 5. Outbuildings (numerical value for presence or absence). Farmyard 02, adjacent to House 01 6. Cottage 02 (numerical value for presence or absence). 7. Outbuildings 02 (numerical value for presence or absence). House and or Farmyard 03, at a distance from house. 8. Cottage 03 (numerical value for presence or absence). 9. Outbuildings 03 (numerical value for presence or absence). House and or Farmyard 04, at a distance from house. 10. Cottage 04 (numerical value for presence or absence). 11. Outbuildings 04 (numerical value for presence or absence). House and or Farmyard 05, at a distance from house. 12. Cottage 05 (numerical value for presence or absence). 13. Outbuildings 05 (numerical value for presence or absence). House and or Farmyard 06, at a distance from house. 14. Cottage 06 (numerical value for presence or absence). 15. Outbuildings 06 (numerical value for presence or absence). 16. Outbuildings Dispersed.
The above information was summarised in a number of additional fields, recording: 1. Total number of houses or cottages. 2. Total number of buildings on the Main House or Garden Block 01. 3. Total number of buildings on the Main House or Garden Block and the adjacent Farmyard 02. 4. Total number of outbuildings. 5. Total number of all outbuildings.
61 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
6. Total number of settlement nuclei. 7. Questions. Where the date of a house or the identification of a property was in doubt, it was noted in this field.
The remaining fields in the baseline archaeological assessment database bring together the previous information or summarise the characteristics of the property. These fields include: 1. Typology. A Typology of the Properties based on the number of houses, buildings and settlement nuclei. 2. Farm Layout, and 3. Plantings or Landscaping.
Typology of Sites.
The following Typology of Sites was adopted as the most useful means of collating the information provided by the desktop survey.
1.1. House and Primary Farmyard, with 20 or more buildings; single nucleus. 1.2. House and Primary Farmyard, with 20 or more buildings; multiple nuclei.
2.1. House and Primary Farmyard, with 15 or more buildings; single nucleus. 2.2. House and Primary Farmyard, with 15 or more buildings; multiple nuclei. 2.3. Primary Farmyard, with 15 or more buildings; single nucleus
3.1. House and Primary Farmyard, with 10 or more buildings; single nucleus 3.2. House and Primary Farmyard, with 10 or more buildings; multiple nuclei 3.3. Primary Farmyard, with 10 or more buildings; multiple nuclei 3.4. House with 10 or more buildings; multiple nuclei
4.1. House and Primary Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings. 4.2. Primary Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings 4.3. House and Primary Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; multiple nuclei with less than 10 buildings. 4.4. House and Primary Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; single nucleus 4.5. Primary Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; single nucleus
62 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4.6. House with 5 or more buildings; single nucleus
5.1. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; multiple nuclei with 20 or more buildings 5.2. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; multiple nuclei with 15 or more buildings 5.3. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings 5.4. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; multiple nuclei with 5 or more buildings 5.5. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; multiple nuclei with 4 or less buildings 5.6. House and Primary Farmyard, with 4 or less buildings; single nucleus 5.7. House with 4 or less buildings; single nucleus
6. Archaeological Site
7.1. Modern Farm
The following additional terms were used, as follows: Australian Agricultural Company - outside scope of study. More research required Not Located Outside Study Area - outside scope of study. Outside the Limits of Location - outside scope of study. Second Listing - where the details of a property are recorded in a related listing. Small Portion - outside scope of study. Town or Suburban Allotment - outside scope of study.
Description of Farm Layout.
The following terminology for House and Primary Farmyard Layout was adopted as the most useful means of collating the information provided by the desktop survey.
1.1. House and Farmyard, rectangular blocks, designed 1.2. House and Farmyard, non-rectangular blocks, designed 1.3. House Block, non-rectangular, designed 1.4. Farmyard, irregular, 2 alignments; remnants of rectangular block, designed
2.1. House and Farmyard, rectangular blocks 2.2. House and Farmyard, rectangular blocks, 2 alignments
63 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3.1. House Block, rectangular
4.1. House Block rectangular; Farmyard irregular, single alignment 4.2. House Block rectangular; Farmyard irregular, 2 alignments 4.3. House Block rectangular; Farmyard irregular, multiple alignments
5.1. House and Farmyard, irregular, single alignment 5.2. House and Farmyard, irregular, 2 alignments 5.3. House and Farmyard, irregular, multiple alignments 5.4. House block, irregular
6.1. Farmyard, irregular, single alignment 6.2. Farmyard, irregular, 2 alignments - not used as yet. 6.3. Farmyard, irregular, multiple alignments
The above terminology makes a distinction between rectangular and rectilinear layouts. While a farm may be planned on a rectilinear layout, the house and farmyard blocks may not be rectangular. In some cases, it was difficult to fit the farm layouts exactly into the above categories and in these cases a best-fit description was adopted from the existing categories. No individual site suggested that the typology should be extended with additional categories.
Description of Farm Plantings and Landscaping.
The following terminology for Farm Landscaping and Plantings was adopted as the most useful means of collating the information provided by the desktop survey.
1.1. Mature Garden 1.2. Mature Garden and Farmyard with mature plantings 1.3. Mature Garden with avenues 1.4. Mature Garden, with avenues, hedges 1.5. Mature Garden, with avenues, hedges, windbreaks
2.1. Some mature plantings near house 2.2. Some mature plantings near House or Farmyard 2.3. Some mature plantings and natives near House or Farmyard 2.4. Some mature plantings near house, with windbreaks 2.5. Some mature plantings and hedgelines 2.6. Hedgelines or windbreaks
3.1. Some mature native trees
4.1. Possible mature plantings
64 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
5.1. No mature plantings
65 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
APPENDIX 3. PRELIMINARY RESULTS OF THE ANALYSIS OF SITES IN THE CLSP HOMESTEAD DATABASE.
The results of the baseline archaeological assessment allow the database of homestead complexes to be assessed in accordance with three principal criteria: 1. Typology of Sites, namely the number of buildings, outbuildings and settlement nuclei. 2. Farm Layout. 3. Plantings and Landscaping.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Cessnock Byora or Old 2820005 3.1. House and 5.2. House and 5.1. No Byora Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 10 or more alignments buildings; single nucleus Cessnock Laguna House 2820006 3.1. House and 5.3. House and 5.1. No Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, multiple plantings 10 or more alignments buildings; single nucleus Cessnock Old Barraba 2820002 4.4. House and 2.1. House and 5.1. No Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 rectangular blocks plantings or more buildings; single nucleus Cessnock The Wilderness 2820003 6. Archaeological Site Cessnock The Wilderness 2820003 6. Archaeological Site Dungog Bingleburra 2820044 4.1. House and 2.2. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 rectangular plantings or more buildings; blocks, 2 and natives multiple nuclei alignments near House with 10 or more or Farmyard buildings. Dungog Bona Vista - 2820018 5.4. House and 5.1. House and 2.1. Some Douribang Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 4 irregular, single plantings or less buildings; alignment near house multiple nuclei with 5 or more buildings Dungog Brookfield - 2820028 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 2.3. Some Lowther Park Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments and natives single nucleus near House or Farmyard Dungog Brookfield - 2820028 6. Archaeological Lowther Park Site
66 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Dungog Caegrwle - 2820010 5.4. House and 5.1. House and 1.1. Mature Allynbrook Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 4 irregular, single or less buildings; alignment multiple nuclei with 5 or more buildings Dungog Cairnsmore 2820037 5.6. House and 5.2. House and 5.1. No Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 4 irregular, 2 plantings or less buildings; alignments single nucleus Dungog Cam Yr Allyn - 2820023 3.2. House and 5.2. House and 1.5. Mature Camyr Allyn Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with irregular, 2 avenues, 10 or more alignments hedges, buildings; multiple windbreaks nuclei Dungog Cam Yr Allyn - 2820023 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 1.1. Mature Camyr Allyn Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 or more buildings; alignments single nucleus Dungog Cangon 2820013 1.1. House and 2.2. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with rectangular Farmyard 20 or more blocks, 2 with mature buildings; single alignments plantings nucleus. Dungog Cardoress 2820015 6. Archaeological 5.1. House and 2.1. Some Site Farmyard, mature irregular, single plantings alignment near house Dungog Cawarra 2820024 3.1. House and 2.2. House and 2.2. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with rectangular plantings 10 or more blocks, 2 near House buildings; single alignments or Farmyard nucleus Dungog Cory Vale (and 2820038 4.4. House and 4.1. House Block 2.3. Some Vacy ?) Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, single and natives single nucleus alignment near House or Farmyard Dungog Cree Bank 2820017 3.3. Primary 5.3. House and 2.2. Some Farmyard, with Farmyard, mature 10 or more irregular, multiple plantings buildings; multiple alignments near House nuclei or Farmyard Dungog Dingadee 2820039 3.2. House and 4.3. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with Farmyard plantings 10 or more irregular, multiple and natives buildings; multiple alignments near House nuclei or Farmyard Dungog Elms Hall 2820082 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near House single nucleus alignments or Farmyard
67 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Dungog Figtree - 2820030 5.1. House and 5.1. House and 2.3. Some Lanquoyah Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 4 irregular, single plantings or less buildings; alignment and natives multiple nuclei near House with 20 or more or Farmyard buildings Dungog Gostwyck 2820019 4.1. House and 4.3. House Block 3.1. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard native trees or more buildings; irregular, multiple multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings. Dungog Lewinsbrook 2820025 5.2. House and 3.1. House Block, 2.1. Some Primary rectangular mature Farmyard, with 4 plantings or less buildings; near house multiple nuclei with 15 or more buildings Dungog Lyndhurst Vale - 2820040 6. Archaeological Verge’s Hut 1830 Site Dungog Maryville 2820014 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 Farmyard or more buildings; alignments with mature single nucleus plantings Dungog Melbee 2820012 5.4. House and 4.3. House Block 1.3. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden with Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard avenues or less buildings; irregular, multiple multiple nuclei alignments with 5 or more buildings Dungog Mowbray - The 2820016 4.6. House with 5 3.1. House Block, 2.4. Some Vineyard or more buildings; rectangular mature single nucleus plantings near house, with windbreaks Dungog Mulconda 2820035 4.1. House and 5.1. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single plantings or more buildings; alignment and natives multiple nuclei near House with 10 or more or Farmyard buildings. Dungog Munni - Down 2820026 5.4. House and 4.3. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard plantings or less buildings; irregular, multiple and natives multiple nuclei alignments near House with 5 or more or Farmyard buildings Dungog Nulla Nulla 2820042 4.1. House and 3.1. House Block, 1.1. Mature Primary rectangular Garden Farmyard, with 5 or more buildings; multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings.
68 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Dungog Penshurst 2820022 5.6. House and 2.1. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 4 rectangular blocks plantings or less buildings; near house single nucleus Dungog The Grange 2820027 4.2. Primary 6.1. Farmyard, 3.1. Some Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single mature or more buildings; alignment native trees multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings Dungog Tillemby - 2820032 2.3. Primary 1.3. Farmyard, 2.5. Some Tillimby - Tillimbi Farmyard, with irregular, 2 mature 15 or more alignments; plantings buildings; single remnants of and nucleus rectangular block, hedgelines designed Dungog Tocal 2820020 2.1. House and 5.1. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with irregular, single Farmyard 15 or more alignment with mature buildings; single plantings nucleus. Dungog Torryburn 2820009 1.1. House and 1.1. House and 1.5. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with rectangular avenues, 20 or more blocks, designed hedges, buildings; single windbreaks nucleus. Dungog Underbank 2820033 3.1. House and 2.2. House and 3.1. Some Estate Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with rectangular native trees 10 or more blocks, 2 buildings; single alignments nucleus Dungog Wirragulla - 2820011 4.1. House and 2.1. House and 1.1. Mature Crooks Park - Primary Farmyard, Garden Wilhur Chulla Farmyard, with 5 rectangular blocks or more buildings; multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings. Dungog Wirragulla - 2820011 5.3. House and 4.3. House Block 1.1. Mature Crooks Park - Primary rectangular; Garden Wilhur Chulla Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard or less buildings; irregular, multiple multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings Dungog Wirragulla - 2820011 7.1. Modern Farm Crooks Park - Wilhur Chulla Gloucester Stobo 2820051 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 1.1. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard or more buildings; irregular, 2 single nucleus alignments Greater Woodside 2820060 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 5.1. No Taree Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments single nucleus
69 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Maitland Aberglasslyn 2820069 4.3. House and 1.3. House Block, 1.5. Mature Primary non-rectangular, Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 designed avenues, or more buildings; hedges, multiple nuclei windbreaks with less than 10 buildings. Maitland Anambah 2820079 3.1. House and 2.1. House and 1.5. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with rectangular blocks avenues, 10 or more hedges, buildings; single windbreaks nucleus Maitland Bellevue - see 2820063 4.3. House and 4.2. House Block 1.1. Mature Mindaribba Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard or more buildings; irregular, 2 multiple nuclei alignments with less than 10 buildings. Maitland Berry Park 2820067 3.1. House and 4.3. House Block 1.1. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with Farmyard 10 or more irregular, multiple buildings; single alignments nucleus Maitland Bolwarra 2820072 4.4. House and 3.1. House Block, 1.4. Mature Primary rectangular Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 avenues, or more buildings; hedges single nucleus Maitland Closebourne - 2820077 3.4. House with 5.4. House block, 1.3. Mature see also Illalaung 10 or more irregular Garden with and Morpeth buildings; multiple avenues House nuclei Maitland Duckenfield 2820067 6. Archaeological Site - see subdivision plan Maitland Dunmore 2820065 4.4. House and 1.1. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 rectangular plantings or more buildings; blocks, designed and natives single nucleus near House or Farmyard Maitland Eelah 2820064 4.4. House and 4.1. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, single and natives single nucleus alignment near House or Farmyard Maitland Kaludah - 2820068 4.1. House and 4.2. House Block 1.4. Mature Lochinvar Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard avenues, or more buildings; irregular, 2 hedges multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings. Maitland Louth Park 2820074 6. Archaeological Site
70 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Maitland Mindaribba - see 2820063 3.1. House and 5.3. House and 2.3. Some Bellevue Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, multiple plantings 10 or more alignments and natives buildings; single near House nucleus or Farmyard Maitland Newington - See 2820075 6. Archaeological also Greenwood Site - see subdivision plan Maitland Owlpen 2820070 5.6. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard plantings or less buildings; irregular, 2 near House single nucleus alignments or Farmyard Maitland Rathluba 2820085 6. Archaeological Site Muswellbrook Baerami 2820104 4.1. House and 4.3. House Block 1.5. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard avenues, or more buildings; irregular, multiple hedges, multiple nuclei alignments windbreaks with 10 or more buildings. Muswellbrook Balmoral 2820105 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 1.3. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden with Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard avenues or more buildings; irregular, 2 single nucleus alignments Muswellbrook Bengalla 2820087 4.4. House and 1.2. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, non- Garden and Farmyard, with 5 rectangular Farmyard or more buildings; blocks, designed with mature single nucleus plantings Muswellbrook Dalmar Stud - 2820087 2.3. Primary 5.3. House and 2.3. Some Celdon Stud - Farmyard, with Farmyard, mature Pickering 15 or more irregular, multiple plantings buildings; single alignments and natives nucleus near House or Farmyard Muswellbrook Edinglassie - See 2820097 3.2. House and 5.2. House and 2.2. Some Rous Lench Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 10 or more alignments near House buildings; multiple or Farmyard nuclei Muswellbrook Martindale 2820090 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 1.5. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 avenues, or more buildings; alignments hedges, single nucleus windbreaks Muswellbrook Merton 2820096 4.3. House and 5.2. House and 1.1. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 or more buildings; alignments multiple nuclei with less than 10 buildings. Muswellbrook Negoa 2820094 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 2.2. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments near House single nucleus or Farmyard
71 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Muswellbrook Overton - 2820086 4.4. House and 5.2. House and 2.4. Some Overdene Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments near house, single nucleus with windbreaks Muswellbrook Pickering - see 2820091 4.3. House and 5.1. House and 2.1. Some alternative listing Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single plantings or more buildings; alignment near house multiple nuclei with less than 10 buildings. Muswellbrook Piercefield 2820089 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 2.1. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near house single nucleus alignments Muswellbrook Plashett 2820100 5.3. House and 4.1. House Block 1.4. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard avenues, or less buildings; irregular, single hedges multiple nuclei alignment with 10 or more buildings Muswellbrook Randwick Park - 2820095 4.1. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Woodlands Stud Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near House multiple nuclei alignments or Farmyard with 10 or more buildings. Muswellbrook Rosebrook - 2820092 4.3. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Rosehill Stud Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near House multiple nuclei alignments or Farmyard with less than 10 buildings. Muswellbrook Skellator - 2820099 4.6. House with 5 5.4. House block, 2.1. Some Skellater or more buildings; irregular mature single nucleus plantings near house Muswellbrook St Hilliers 2820103 6. Archaeological 4.3. House Block 2.2. Some Site - no main rectangular; mature house Farmyard plantings irregular, multiple near House alignments or Farmyard Port Balikera - 2820120 4.4. House and 4.1. House Block 1.1. Mature Stephens Ballacara Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard or more buildings; irregular, single single nucleus alignment Port Brandon Estate 2820131 4.4. House and 1.2. House and 1.4. Mature Stephens Primary Farmyard, non- Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 rectangular avenues, or more buildings; blocks, designed hedges single nucleus Port Burrowell 2820108 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 2.4. Some Stephens Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near house, single nucleus alignments with windbreaks
72 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Port Duninald - see 2820106 3.2. House and 4.3. House Block 1.2. Mature Stephens other listing Primary rectangular; Garden and Farmyard, with Farmyard Farmyard 10 or more irregular, multiple with mature buildings; multiple alignments plantings nuclei Port Eskdale 2820109 4.1. House and 5.2. House and 2.3. Some Stephens Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments and natives multiple nuclei near House with 10 or more or Farmyard buildings. Port Glen Livett 2820121 5.2. House and 4.3. House Block 3.1. Some Stephens Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 4 Farmyard native trees or less buildings; irregular, multiple multiple nuclei alignments with 15 or more buildings Port Hinton 2820111 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 1.5. Mature Stephens Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard avenues, or more buildings; irregular, 2 hedges, single nucleus alignments windbreaks Port Kinross 2820112 4.4. House and 5.1. House and 2.1. Some Stephens Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single plantings or more buildings; alignment near house single nucleus Port Osterley Park 2820124 6. Archaeological Stephens Site Port Porphyry Point 2820110 6. Archaeological 6.1. Farmyard, 3.1. Some Stephens Site irregular, single mature alignment native trees Port Porphyry Point 2820110 6. Archaeological Stephens Site Port Porphyry Point 2820110 6. Archaeological Stephens Site Port Tahlee 2820114 4.6. House with 5 5.4. House block, 1.1. Mature Stephens or more buildings; irregular Garden single nucleus Port Tomago 2820113 5.7. House with 4 5.4. House block, 2.3. Some Stephens or less buildings; irregular mature single nucleus plantings and natives near House or Farmyard Port Wallalong 2820107 5.4. House and 1.2. House and 1.4. Mature Stephens Primary Farmyard, non- Garden, with Farmyard, with 4 rectangular avenues, or less buildings; blocks, designed hedges multiple nuclei with 5 or more buildings Port Woodville 2820119 6. Archaeological Stephens Site - Further research required Singleton Abbey Green 2820151 4.4. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near House single nucleus alignments or Farmyard
73 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Singleton Archerfield 2820147 4.4. House and 5.1. House and 1.4. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single avenues, or more buildings; alignment hedges single nucleus Singleton Baroona - 2820149 3.2. House and 1.2. House and 1.5. Mature Rosemount Primary Farmyard, non- Garden, with Farmyard, with rectangular avenues, 10 or more blocks, designed hedges, buildings; multiple windbreaks nuclei Singleton Castle Forbes 2820152 4.1. House and 4.2. House Block 2.6. Primary rectangular; Hedgelines Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard or or more buildings; irregular, 2 windbreaks multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings. Singleton Corinda 2820142 6. Archaeological Site - see subdivision plan Singleton Dalwood House - 2820144 4.4. House and 4.1. House Block 2.2. Some Wyndham Estate Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, single near House single nucleus alignment or Farmyard Singleton Dulwich - see 2820154 4.4. House and 4.3. House Block 1.4. Mature Kangory Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard avenues, or more buildings; irregular, multiple hedges single nucleus alignments Singleton Glendon 2820137 3.1. House and 5.2. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 10 or more alignments near house buildings; single nucleus Singleton Greenwood - see 2820150 3.1. House and 4.2. House Block 1.1. Mature also Newington Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with Farmyard 10 or more irregular, 2 buildings; single alignments nucleus Singleton Kirkton 2820143 6. Archaeological Site Singleton Leconfield 2820145 4.1. House and 4.1. House Block 1.1. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard or more buildings; irregular, single multiple nuclei alignment with 10 or more buildings. Singleton Manresa 2820156 4.4. House and 2.1. House and 1.1. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 5 rectangular blocks or more buildings; single nucleus Singleton Minimbah - 2820161 4.6. House with 5 3.1. House Block, 1.1. Mature Minembah or more buildings; rectangular Garden single nucleus Singleton Minimbah - Old 2820161 6. Archaeological Minembah - Site - see Singleton Military subdivision plan Area
74 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Singleton Mount Leonard 2820159 4.4. House and 2.2. House and 1.3. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden with Farmyard, with 5 rectangular avenues or more buildings; blocks, 2 single nucleus alignments Singleton Neotsfield 2820148 4.1. House and 2.2. House and 1.4. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with 5 rectangular avenues, or more buildings; blocks, 2 hedges multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings. Singleton Ravensworth 2820138 4.4. House and 1.1. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with 5 rectangular Farmyard or more buildings; blocks, designed with mature single nucleus plantings Singleton Redbourneberry 2820157 5.7. House with 4 3.1. House Block, 1.1. Mature or less buildings; rectangular Garden single nucleus Singleton St Clair 2820170 6. Archaeological Site - Submerged Singleton Wambo 2820146 4.4. House and 2.1. House and 2.5. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 rectangular blocks plantings or more buildings; and single nucleus hedgelines Upper Hunter Belltrees 2820179 2.2. House and 4.3. House Block 1.5. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden, with Farmyard, with Farmyard avenues, 15 or more irregular, multiple hedges, buildings; multiple alignments windbreaks nuclei. Upper Hunter Bickham 2820195 1.2. House and 5.3. House and 2.2. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, multiple plantings 20 or more alignments near House buildings; multiple or Farmyard nuclei. Upper Hunter Brindley Park 2820174 4.1. House and 1.3. House Block, 2.1. Some Primary non-rectangular, mature Farmyard, with 5 designed plantings or more buildings; near house multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings. Upper Hunter Cassilis 2820172 4.3. House and 5.3. House and 1.1. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 5 irregular, multiple or more buildings; alignments multiple nuclei with less than 10 buildings. Upper Hunter Cliffdale 2820203 4.1. House and 5.2. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, 2 plantings or more buildings; alignments near house multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings.
75 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Upper Hunter Collaroy 2820171 3.2. House and 4.3. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with Farmyard plantings 10 or more irregular, multiple and natives buildings; multiple alignments near House nuclei or Farmyard Upper Hunter Cressfield 2820205 4.1. House and 4.3. House Block 2.1. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, multiple near house multiple nuclei alignments with 10 or more buildings. Upper Hunter Cuan 2820197 3.1. House and 4.3. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with Farmyard plantings 10 or more irregular, multiple and natives buildings; single alignments near House nucleus or Farmyard Upper Hunter Cullingral 2820214 2.3. Primary 4.2. House Block 1.1. Mature Farmyard, with rectangular; Garden 15 or more Farmyard buildings; single irregular, 2 nucleus alignments Upper Hunter Dalkeith 2820188 3.1. House and 5.3. House and 1.3. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden with Farmyard, with irregular, multiple avenues 10 or more alignments buildings; single nucleus Upper Hunter Elmswood 2820204 4.4. House and 5.3. House and 1.1. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden Farmyard, with 5 irregular, multiple or more buildings; alignments single nucleus Upper Hunter Glen Alvon - 2820194 3.1. House and 5.1. House and 1.3. Mature Glenalvon Primary Farmyard, Garden with Farmyard, with irregular, single avenues 10 or more alignment buildings; single nucleus Upper Hunter Grampian Hills 2820206 3.2. House and 5.2. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 10 or more alignments near house buildings; multiple nuclei Upper Hunter Harben Vale 2820198 3.2. House and 4.1. House Block 1.2. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden and Farmyard, with Farmyard Farmyard 10 or more irregular, single with mature buildings; multiple alignment plantings nuclei Upper Hunter Invermein 2820181 4.3. House and 5.3. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, multiple plantings or more buildings; alignments and natives multiple nuclei near House with less than 10 or Farmyard buildings.
76 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Upper Hunter Kayuga (and 2820093 6. Archaeological 6.3. Farmyard, 2.2. Some Rose Vale Site - no main irregular, multiple mature Cottage) house alignments plantings near House or Farmyard Upper Hunter Kelvinside 2820189 5.7. House with 4 5.4. House block, 2.1. Some or less buildings; irregular mature single nucleus plantings near house Upper Hunter Kingslyn 2820209 3.1. House and 4.3. House Block 2.2. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with Farmyard plantings 10 or more irregular, multiple near House buildings; single alignments or Farmyard nucleus Upper Hunter Llangollen 2820208 2.2. House and 5.2. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 15 or more alignments and natives buildings; multiple near House nuclei. or Farmyard Upper Hunter Milgarra 2820183 5.5. House and 5.1. House and 2.3. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 4 irregular, single plantings or less buildings; alignment and natives multiple nuclei near House with 4 or less or Farmyard buildings Upper Hunter Puen Buen 2820175 1.1. House and 2.2. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with rectangular Farmyard 20 or more blocks, 2 with mature buildings; single alignments plantings nucleus. Upper Hunter Satur 2820176 5.7. House with 4 5.4. House block, 1.1. Mature or less buildings; irregular Garden single nucleus Upper Hunter Segenhoe 2820182 2.2. House and 2.2. House and 1.4. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with rectangular avenues, 15 or more blocks, 2 hedges buildings; multiple alignments nuclei. Upper Hunter St Aubins 2820178 1.2. House and 5.2. House and 1.4. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden, with Farmyard, with irregular, 2 avenues, 20 or more alignments hedges buildings; multiple nuclei. Upper Hunter Terragong 2820173 4.1. House and 4.3. House Block 1.2. Mature Primary rectangular; Garden and Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard Farmyard or more buildings; irregular, multiple with mature multiple nuclei alignments plantings with 10 or more buildings. Upper Hunter Thornthwaite 2820180 3.2. House and 4.3. House Block 2.3. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with Farmyard plantings 10 or more irregular, multiple and natives buildings; multiple alignments near House nuclei or Farmyard
77 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings Upper Hunter Timor 2820186 4.1. House and 5.1. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with 5 irregular, single plantings or more buildings; alignment near house multiple nuclei with 10 or more buildings. Upper Hunter Turanville 2820177 3.2. House and 5.2. House and 1.2. Mature Primary Farmyard, Garden and Farmyard, with irregular, 2 Farmyard 10 or more alignments with mature buildings; multiple plantings nuclei Upper Hunter Waverley 2820210 2.2. House and 5.3. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, multiple plantings 15 or more alignments near house buildings; multiple nuclei. Upper Hunter Yarrandi 2820196 4.1. House and 4.2. House Block 2.2. Some Primary rectangular; mature Farmyard, with 5 Farmyard plantings or more buildings; irregular, 2 near House multiple nuclei alignments or Farmyard with 10 or more buildings. Upper Hunter Yarrawonga 2820207 3.2. House and 5.2. House and 2.1. Some Primary Farmyard, mature Farmyard, with irregular, 2 plantings 10 or more alignments near house buildings; multiple nuclei
78