HUNTER ESTATES
A Comparative Heritage Study ofpre 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
Hunter Estates Comparative Heritage Study
Appendix 3: Historic Archaeology Report
CLIVE LUCAS, STAPLETON & PARTNERS PTY LTD Appendices
Hunter Estates Comparative Heritage Study
NINETEENTH CENTURY RURALHOMESTEAD 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 HOMESTEADCOMPLEXES 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
www.higginbotham.com.au
For
Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners.
Draft September 2012
Final
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
ii
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
iii
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
iv
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.
The author would like to thank
Client: Hector Abrahams and Kate Denny, Clive Lucas Stapleton
& Partners.
Aboriginal
Archaeology
Dominic Steele, Dominic Steele Consulting Archaeology.
Historical Research Nicholas Jackson.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
1
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
2
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 HeritageStrategy. Wambo Coal Pty Ltd.3 Heritage Office and Department of Urban Affairs and Planning. 1996. Statementsof 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 HeritageManual Update.
J. S. Kerr’s The Conservation Plan.
The ICOMOS Burra Charter.4 Clive Lucas Stapleton & Partners, 2012. Homestead Database.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
3
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
4
Figure 1.1. The Study Area comprising the twelve local government areas of Greater Taree, GreatLakes, Port Stephens, Gloucester, Dungog, Upper Hunter, Muswellbrook, Singleton, Maitland,Cessnock, Newcastle and Lake Macquarie.Source. Office of Environment and Heritage.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
5
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
6
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 theSituation and Extent of The Appropriated Lands, including the Counties, Towns,
Village Reserves, Etc, Compiled from Authentic Surveys etc is respectfully dedicatedto 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 Publishedby William Baker, Hiberni[an] Press King Street East. 1843-1846. National Library of
Australia. Map RaA 8.
http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-raa88 “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-e9 “Map of the Hunter River…”, engraved by Joseph Cross, London, 1828. Source. National
Library of Australia
http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-nk646-e
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
7
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
10,000 acplus
Properties
2560 acplus, up to
10,000 ac
Other
properties
CLSP
Database
Notes.
Greater
Taree
1 2 12 1
Great lakes 0 1 0 6 Excluding
AAC
Port
Stephens
0 7 61 31 Excluding
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
Macquarie
1 2 7 2
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?
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
8
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%).
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
9
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
10
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-eThis 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).
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
11
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-eBy 1828 free settlement had reached nearly the full extent of the Hunter Valley. Ships and steamerswith 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 theHunter until the construction of the railway in 1857.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
12
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 andNorthumberland.Source. Robert Dixon. 1837. ‘This Map of the Colony of New South Wales Exhibiting the Situation andExtent of The Appropriated Lands, including the Counties, Towns, Village Reserves, Etc, Compiled fromAuthentic Surveys etc is respectfully dedicated to Sir John Barrow Bart, President of the RoyalGeographic Society Etc Etc Etc Etc, by His Obliged Humble Servant Robert Dixon. Engraved by J. & C.Walker. SR Map 4617.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
13
Figure 2.4. Map of the County of Durham, showing the extent of land alienated from the Crown, togetherwith 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 Purchasesand Unlocated Lands. Sydney, Printed and Published by William Baker, Hiberni[an] Press King StreetEast. 1843-1846. National Library of Australia. Map RaA 8.http://nla.gov.au/nla.map-raa8
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
14
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
15
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. ReedPublications. Artarmon, Sydney.12 Higginbotham, E. 1994. ‘The historical archaeology of rural settlement in theSouth Western Districts of New South Wales’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney.
Volume 1: 6.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
16
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
17
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 ruralsettlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 52-75.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
18
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 ruralsettlement 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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
19
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 AlexanderFoundation. Tocal. 2008.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
20
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
21
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 ruralsettlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 63.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
22
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
23
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 theSouth Western Districts of New South Wales’, Ph.D. Thesis, University of Sydney.
Volume 1. Chapter 5.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
24
Improvements. Totalnumber
Frequency(%).
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 ruralsettlement in NSW', Australasian Historical Archaeology. Volume 11. p. 69.25 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. Goulburn Mulwaree ArchaeologicalManagement Plan. Goulburn Mulwaree Council. December 2010. Volume 2: 26ff.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
25
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,
features.
Number of sites with these items.
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 Britishderivation.
2
Cottage – Vernacular. 14
Colonial Georgian 8
Georgian. 13
Victorian. 7
Victorian Italianate. 2
26 Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. Goulburn Mulwaree ArchaeologicalManagement Plan. Goulburn Mulwaree Council. December 2010. Volume 2: 26ff.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
26
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
27
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
plans.
3
Historical documentation or aerial
photographic evidence
3 (sample only).
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 fencedand tree lined enclosures.
11
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 and21 (number).
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
28
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
29
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 thesouth, indicating that both were used as runs.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
30
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 thehomestead complex and its shearing shed.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
31
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 buildingswould have housed the workers on the estate and no doubt the convict workforce prior to the 1840s.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
32
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 standingbuildings.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
33
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.htm32 http://parishmaps.lands.nsw.gov.au/pmap.html33 https://maps.google.com/
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
34
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
archaeological assessment
94
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
35
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
36
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
37
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
38
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
39
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
40
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/130635 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/#c18640836 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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
41
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
42
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
43
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
44
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?
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
45
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
46
11. All the homestead complexes identified in this study should be listed as
archaeological sites, as well as heritage items.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
47
APPENDIX 1. CADASTRAL MAPS OF EACH LOCAL COUNCIL AREA,
SHOWING THE DISTRIBUTION OF PROPERTIES ESTABLISHED BEFORE THE
1850S.
*S
heep
Sta
tion
Cre
ek
640
orle
ssac
res
1280
orle
ssac
res
less
than
2560
acre
s
2560
orm
ore
acre
s
Bla
ck-G
rant
eena
me
Red
-+P
rope
rtyN
ame
Whi
te-o
ther
sect
ions
3P
rope
rties
of25
60ac
res
orm
ore.
12ot
hers
mal
lerp
rope
rties
Num
bero
foth
erpo
rtion
son
Bak
ers
Map
,bu
tnot
onC
ount
yM
ap.
Not
incl
udin
gA
AC
opr
oper
ties.
GR
EA
TER
TAR
EE
LGA
AA
Co
Out
side
the
Lim
itsof
Loca
tion
10km
s
10m
iles
10,0
00ac
+
640
orle
ssac
res
1280
orle
ssac
res
less
than
2560
acre
s
2560
orm
ore
acre
s
Bla
ck-G
rant
eena
me
Red
-+P
rope
rtyN
ame
1P
rope
rtyof
2560
acre
sor
mor
e.0
othe
rsm
alle
rpro
perti
esN
otin
clud
ing
AA
Co
prop
ertie
s.G
RE
AT
LAK
ES
LGA
AA
Co
Stro
ud
Boo
ral Car
ringt
on
10km
s
10m
iles
Glo
uces
ter
*H
ead
ofN
avig
atio
n
UP
PE
RH
UN
TER
LGA
45P
rope
rties
of25
60ac
res
orm
ore.
114
othe
rsm
alle
rpro
perti
esN
umbe
rofo
ther
porti
ons
onB
aker
sM
ap,
butn
oton
Cou
nty
Map
.
640
orle
ssac
res
1280
orle
ssac
res
less
than
2560
acre
s
2560
orm
ore
acre
s
Bla
ck-G
rant
eena
me
Red
-+P
rope
rtyN
ame
Whi
te-o
ther
sect
ions
Mer
riwa
Ails
aC
asilli
s
?S
mal
lPor
tions
Sco
ne
AA
Co
Gra
nt24
9,60
0ac
resLi
verp
oolP
lain
s
AA
Co
Gra
nt31
2,29
8ac
res
Bey
ond
the
Lim
itsof
Loca
tion
10km
s
10m
iles
10,0
00ac
+
10,0
00ac
+
10,0
00ac
+
10,0
00ac
+
10,0
00ac
+
*B
arry
Sta
tion
*S
chof
ield
sC
hurc
h
MU
SW
ELL
BR
OO
KLG
A
18P
rope
rties
of25
60ac
res
orm
ore.
47(4
outs
ide
LGA
)oth
ersm
alle
rpro
perti
esN
umbe
rofo
ther
porti
ons
onB
aker
sM
ap,
butn
oton
Cou
nty
Map
.
640
orle
ssac
res
1280
orle
ssac
res
less
than
2560
acre
s
2560
orm
ore
acre
s
Bla
ck-G
rant
eena
me
Red
-+P
rope
rtyN
ame
Whi
te-o
ther
sect
ions
Den
man
Mus
wel
lbro
ok
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
10km
s
10m
iles
10,0
00ac
+
10,0
00ac
+
MA
ITLA
ND
LGA
640
orle
ssac
res
1280
orle
ssac
res
less
than
2560
acre
s
2560
orm
ore
acre
s
Bla
ck-G
rant
eena
me
Red
-+P
rope
rtyN
ame
Whi
te-o
ther
sect
ions
3P
rope
rties
of25
60ac
res
orm
ore.
53ot
hers
mal
lerp
rope
rties
Clu
ster
sof
smal
lpor
tions
.
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
WM
aitla
ndE
Mai
tland
Mor
peth
Hin
ton
10km
s
10m
iles
Sm
allP
ortio
ns
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
60
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
61
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.
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
62
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
63
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
64
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
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
65
5.1. No mature plantings
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
66
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 OldByora
2820005 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with
10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2
alignments
5.1. Nomatureplantings
Cessnock Laguna House 2820006 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or more
buildings; singlenucleus
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
5.1. Nomatureplantings
Cessnock Old Barraba 2820002 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
2.1. House andFarmyard,rectangular blocks
5.1. Nomatureplantings
Cessnock The Wilderness 2820003 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Cessnock The Wilderness 2820003 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Dungog Bingleburra 2820044 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangular
blocks, 2alignments
2.3. Somematureplantings
and nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Bona Vista -Douribang
2820018 5.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;
multiple nucleiwith 5 or morebuildings
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Dungog Brookfield -Lowther Park
2820028 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand natives
near Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Brookfield -Lowther Park
2820028 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
67
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Dungog Caegrwle -Allynbrook
2820010 5.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 5 or morebuildings
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
1.1. MatureGarden
Dungog Cairnsmore 2820037 5.6. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
5.1. Nomatureplantings
Dungog Cam Yr Allyn -Camyr Allyn
2820023 3.2. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.2. House andFarmyard,
irregular, 2alignments
1.5. MatureGarden, with
avenues,hedges,windbreaks
Dungog Cam Yr Allyn -Camyr Allyn
2820023 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2
alignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Dungog Cangon 2820013 1.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with20 or morebuildings; singlenucleus.
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Dungog Cardoress 2820015 6. ArchaeologicalSite
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Dungog Cawarra 2820024 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with
10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangular
blocks, 2alignments
2.2. Somematureplantings
near Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Cory Vale (andVacy ?)
2820038 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
single nucleus
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, single
alignment
2.3. Somematureplantingsand natives
near Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Cree Bank 2820017 3.3. PrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Dingadee 2820039 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Elms Hall 2820082 4.4. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;
Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somemature
plantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
68
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Dungog Figtree -Lanquoyah
2820030 5.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 20 or morebuildings
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Gostwyck 2820019 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
3.1. Somematurenative trees
Dungog Lewinsbrook 2820025 5.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 15 or morebuildings
3.1. House Block,rectangular
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Dungog Lyndhurst Vale -Verge’s Hut 1830
2820040 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Dungog Maryville 2820014 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Dungog Melbee 2820012 5.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 5 or morebuildings
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.3. MatureGarden withavenues
Dungog Mowbray - The
Vineyard
2820016 4.6. House with 5
or more buildings;single nucleus
3.1. House Block,
rectangular
2.4. Some
matureplantingsnear house,withwindbreaks
Dungog Mulconda 2820035 4.1. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
5.1. House andFarmyard,
irregular, singlealignment
2.3. Somemature
plantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Munni - Down 2820026 5.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4
or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 5 or morebuildings
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyard
irregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somematureplantings
and nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Dungog Nulla Nulla 2820042 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
3.1. House Block,rectangular
1.1. MatureGarden
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
69
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Dungog Penshurst 2820022 5.6. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;single nucleus
2.1. House andFarmyard,rectangular blocks
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Dungog The Grange 2820027 4.2. Primary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings
6.1. Farmyard,
irregular, singlealignment
3.1. Some
maturenative trees
Dungog Tillemby -Tillimby - Tillimbi
2820032 2.3. PrimaryFarmyard, with15 or more
buildings; singlenucleus
1.3. Farmyard,irregular, 2alignments;
remnants ofrectangular block,designed
2.5. Somematureplantings
andhedgelines
Dungog Tocal 2820020 2.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with15 or more
buildings; singlenucleus.
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith mature
plantings
Dungog Torryburn 2820009 1.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with20 or morebuildings; singlenucleus.
1.1. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, designed
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Dungog UnderbankEstate
2820033 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
3.1. Somematurenative trees
Dungog Wirragulla -
Crooks Park -Wilhur Chulla
2820011 4.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
2.1. House and
Farmyard,rectangular blocks
1.1. Mature
Garden
Dungog Wirragulla -
Crooks Park -Wilhur Chulla
2820011 5.3. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings
4.3. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.1. Mature
Garden
Dungog Wirragulla -Crooks Park -
Wilhur Chulla
2820011 7.1. Modern Farm
Gloucester Stobo 2820051 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Greater
Taree
Woodside 2820060 4.4. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House and
Farmyard,irregular, 2alignments
5.1. No
matureplantings
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
70
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Maitland Aberglasslyn 2820069 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
1.3. House Block,non-rectangular,designed
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Maitland Anambah 2820079 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
2.1. House andFarmyard,rectangular blocks
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Maitland Bellevue - see
Mindaribba
2820063 4.3. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
4.2. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.1. Mature
Garden
Maitland Berry Park 2820067 3.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
4.3. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.1. Mature
Garden
Maitland Bolwarra 2820072 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;single nucleus
3.1. House Block,rectangular
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,
hedges
Maitland Closebourne -see also Illalaungand MorpethHouse
2820077 3.4. House with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.4. House block,irregular
1.3. MatureGarden withavenues
Maitland Duckenfield 2820067 6. Archaeological
Site - seesubdivision plan
Maitland Dunmore 2820065 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
1.1. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, designed
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear House
or Farmyard
Maitland Eelah 2820064 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, singlealignment
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Maitland Kaludah -Lochinvar
2820068 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges
Maitland Louth Park 2820074 6. Archaeological
Site
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
71
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Maitland Mindaribba - seeBellevue
2820063 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Maitland Newington - Seealso Greenwood
2820075 6. ArchaeologicalSite - seesubdivision plan
Maitland Owlpen 2820070 5.6. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Maitland Rathluba 2820085 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Muswellbrook Baerami 2820104 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nuclei
with 10 or morebuildings.
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Muswellbrook Balmoral 2820105 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.3. MatureGarden withavenues
Muswellbrook Bengalla 2820087 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
1.2. House andFarmyard, non-rectangularblocks, designed
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Muswellbrook Dalmar Stud -Celdon Stud -
Pickering
2820087 2.3. PrimaryFarmyard, with
15 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
5.3. House andFarmyard,
irregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somemature
plantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Muswellbrook Edinglassie - SeeRous Lench
2820097 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or more
buildings; multiplenuclei
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear House
or Farmyard
Muswellbrook Martindale 2820090 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Muswellbrook Merton 2820096 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Muswellbrook Negoa 2820094 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
72
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Muswellbrook Overton -Overdene
2820086 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.4. Somematureplantingsnear house,withwindbreaks
Muswellbrook Pickering - seealternative listing
2820091 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Muswellbrook Piercefield 2820089 4.4. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.1. Some
matureplantingsnear house
Muswellbrook Plashett 2820100 5.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4
or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyard
irregular, singlealignment
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,
hedges
Muswellbrook Randwick Park -Woodlands Stud
2820095 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2
alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear House
or Farmyard
Muswellbrook Rosebrook -Rosehill Stud
2820092 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2
alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear House
or Farmyard
Muswellbrook Skellator -Skellater
2820099 4.6. House with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.4. House block,irregular
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Muswellbrook St Hilliers 2820103 6. ArchaeologicalSite - no mainhouse
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
PortStephens
Balikera -Ballacara
2820120 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;single nucleus
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyard
irregular, singlealignment
1.1. MatureGarden
PortStephens
Brandon Estate 2820131 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
1.2. House andFarmyard, non-rectangularblocks, designed
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges
PortStephens
Burrowell 2820108 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.4. Somematureplantingsnear house,withwindbreaks
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
73
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
PortStephens
Duninald - seeother listing
2820106 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
PortStephens
Eskdale 2820109 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Port
Stephens
Glen Livett 2820121 5.2. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 15 or morebuildings
4.3. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
3.1. Some
maturenative trees
Port
Stephens
Hinton 2820111 4.4. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.5. Mature
Garden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
PortStephens
Kinross 2820112 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
single nucleus
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
PortStephens
Osterley Park 2820124 6. ArchaeologicalSite
PortStephens
Porphyry Point 2820110 6. ArchaeologicalSite
6.1. Farmyard,irregular, singlealignment
3.1. Somematurenative trees
PortStephens
Porphyry Point 2820110 6. ArchaeologicalSite
PortStephens
Porphyry Point 2820110 6. ArchaeologicalSite
PortStephens
Tahlee 2820114 4.6. House with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.4. House block,irregular
1.1. MatureGarden
PortStephens
Tomago 2820113 5.7. House with 4or less buildings;single nucleus
5.4. House block,irregular
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Port
Stephens
Wallalong 2820107 5.4. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 5 or morebuildings
1.2. House and
Farmyard, non-rectangularblocks, designed
1.4. Mature
Garden, withavenues,hedges
Port
Stephens
Woodville 2820119 6. Archaeological
Site - Furtherresearch required
Singleton Abbey Green 2820151 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
74
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Singleton Archerfield 2820147 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges
Singleton Baroona -
Rosemount
2820149 3.2. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
1.2. House and
Farmyard, non-rectangularblocks, designed
1.5. Mature
Garden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Singleton Castle Forbes 2820152 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5
or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyard
irregular, 2alignments
2.6.Hedgelinesor
windbreaks
Singleton Corinda 2820142 6. ArchaeologicalSite - seesubdivision plan
Singleton Dalwood House -Wyndham Estate
2820144 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, singlealignment
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Singleton Dulwich - seeKangory
2820154 4.4. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
4.3. House Blockrectangular;
Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.4. MatureGarden, with
avenues,hedges
Singleton Glendon 2820137 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; single
nucleus
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Singleton Greenwood - seealso Newington
2820150 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Singleton Kirkton 2820143 6. ArchaeologicalSite
Singleton Leconfield 2820145 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nuclei
with 10 or morebuildings.
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, singlealignment
1.1. MatureGarden
Singleton Manresa 2820156 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
2.1. House andFarmyard,rectangular blocks
1.1. MatureGarden
Singleton Minimbah -Minembah
2820161 4.6. House with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
3.1. House Block,rectangular
1.1. MatureGarden
Singleton Minimbah - OldMinembah -Singleton MilitaryArea
2820161 6. ArchaeologicalSite - seesubdivision plan
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
75
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Singleton Mount Leonard 2820159 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
1.3. MatureGarden withavenues
Singleton Neotsfield 2820148 4.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
2.2. House and
Farmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
1.4. Mature
Garden, withavenues,hedges
Singleton Ravensworth 2820138 4.4. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
1.1. House andFarmyard,
rectangularblocks, designed
1.2. MatureGarden and
Farmyardwith matureplantings
Singleton Redbourneberry 2820157 5.7. House with 4or less buildings;single nucleus
3.1. House Block,rectangular
1.1. MatureGarden
Singleton St Clair 2820170 6. Archaeological
Site - Submerged
Singleton Wambo 2820146 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
2.1. House andFarmyard,rectangular blocks
2.5. Somematureplantingsandhedgelines
Upper Hunter Belltrees 2820179 2.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with15 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.5. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges,windbreaks
Upper Hunter Bickham 2820195 1.2. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with20 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
5.3. House andFarmyard,
irregular, multiplealignments
2.2. Somemature
plantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Brindley Park 2820174 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
1.3. House Block,non-rectangular,designed
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Cassilis 2820172 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;
multiple nucleiwith less than 10buildings.
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Upper Hunter Cliffdale 2820203 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nuclei
with 10 or morebuildings.
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
76
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Upper Hunter Collaroy 2820171 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Cressfield 2820205 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Cuan 2820197 3.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
4.3. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Some
matureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Cullingral 2820214 2.3. PrimaryFarmyard, with
15 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
4.2. House Blockrectangular;
Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Upper Hunter Dalkeith 2820188 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; single
nucleus
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
1.3. MatureGarden withavenues
Upper Hunter Elmswood 2820204 4.4. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;single nucleus
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
1.1. MatureGarden
Upper Hunter Glen Alvon -
Glenalvon
2820194 3.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; singlenucleus
5.1. House and
Farmyard,irregular, singlealignment
1.3. Mature
Garden withavenues
Upper Hunter Grampian Hills 2820206 3.2. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.2. House andFarmyard,
irregular, 2alignments
2.1. Somemature
plantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Harben Vale 2820198 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or more
buildings; multiplenuclei
4.1. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, single
alignment
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith mature
plantings
Upper Hunter Invermein 2820181 4.3. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nuclei
with less than 10buildings.
5.3. House andFarmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear House
or Farmyard
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
77
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Upper Hunter Kayuga (andRose ValeCottage)
2820093 6. ArchaeologicalSite - no mainhouse
6.3. Farmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Kelvinside 2820189 5.7. House with 4
or less buildings;single nucleus
5.4. House block,
irregular
2.1. Some
matureplantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Kingslyn 2820209 3.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; single
nucleus
4.3. House Blockrectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.2. Somematureplantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Llangollen 2820208 2.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with15 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Milgarra 2820183 5.5. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 4or less buildings;multiple nucleiwith 4 or lessbuildings
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.3. Somematureplantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Puen Buen 2820175 1.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with20 or morebuildings; singlenucleus.
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Upper Hunter Satur 2820176 5.7. House with 4or less buildings;
single nucleus
5.4. House block,irregular
1.1. MatureGarden
Upper Hunter Segenhoe 2820182 2.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with15 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
2.2. House andFarmyard,rectangularblocks, 2alignments
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges
Upper Hunter St Aubins 2820178 1.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with20 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
1.4. MatureGarden, withavenues,hedges
Upper Hunter Terragong 2820173 4.1. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.3. House Block
rectangular;Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
1.2. Mature
Garden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Upper Hunter Thornthwaite 2820180 3.2. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
4.3. House Blockrectangular;
Farmyardirregular, multiplealignments
2.3. Somemature
plantingsand nativesnear Houseor Farmyard
Edward Higginbotham & Associates Pty Ltd. (02) 9716-5154.
78
LGA Name SHI Typology Layout Plantings
Upper Hunter Timor 2820186 4.1. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
5.1. House andFarmyard,irregular, singlealignment
2.1. Somematureplantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Turanville 2820177 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2alignments
1.2. MatureGarden andFarmyardwith matureplantings
Upper Hunter Waverley 2820210 2.2. House and
PrimaryFarmyard, with15 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei.
5.3. House and
Farmyard,irregular, multiplealignments
2.1. Some
matureplantingsnear house
Upper Hunter Yarrandi 2820196 4.1. House andPrimary
Farmyard, with 5or more buildings;multiple nucleiwith 10 or morebuildings.
4.2. House Blockrectangular;
Farmyardirregular, 2alignments
2.2. Somemature
plantingsnear Houseor Farmyard
Upper Hunter Yarrawonga 2820207 3.2. House andPrimaryFarmyard, with
10 or morebuildings; multiplenuclei
5.2. House andFarmyard,irregular, 2
alignments
2.1. Somematureplantings
near house