Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Introduction
30
archaeological issues does not have to be counterproductive nor acrimonious. While the Federal Courts
instructions to native title expert witnesses states that
this role is not to be seen as adversarial, there are
many examples of this occurringparticularly with
anthropological evidenceand particularly where
the Crown is aggressively contesting native title.
The data collection process on both sides was
sometimes at considerable variance to the conventional
manner in which systematic survey and documentation of archaeological evidence is usually collected,
be it for research or cultural heritage management.
Archaeological research usually aims to purposively
sample and document landscapes in a manner that
allows predictive statements to be made, patterns of
occupation to be gleaned and falsifiable conclusions
to be drawn. Veths initial recording of the archaeological evidence was at the behest of the claimants. It
focused on sites known to the claimantsand
locations that were of contemporary importance to
the claimants (mythological, evidence for residence
and historic association). The claimants targeted
sites for which they had knowledge and memory of
use. The recording exercise by the Crown involved
finding the claimants sites, and validating the earlier
recordings (usually in the absence of claimants). This
highlighted that archaeologists, if left to their own
devices, conventionally collect different types of data
(assuming levels of competence and vigilance). For
instance, if interested in open site archaeology, an
archaeologist would not usually record a specific
point location within an open artefact scatter in the
absence of its broader manifestations (i.e. continual
artefact distributions with variable densities and foci
along hundreds of metres of creekline). Similarly, in a
complex of rock-art shelters, it would be unconventional to record only evidence from one shelter when
there were five more within close proximityand a
clinal evidence of stone artefacts between this and a
nearby claypan open site. Archaeologists usually
endeavour to understand an archaeological landscape
in terms of its overall presence and interspatial
patterningto understand how a site fits within a
network of related features.
A random stratified or systematic approach to
data collection across a landscape may well result in a
more comprehensive documentation of all surface
archaeological evidence in a broad landscape sense.
Arguably what are recorded, however, are the
palimpsests of long-term occupation. On the other
hand, the claimants have selectively identified those
31
32
33
34
35
Site type
Artefact scatter
Artefact scatter, grinding patches
Habitation structures
Quarry, reduction areas
Shelter with rock-art
Shelter with rock-art/deposit
Artefact scatter, hearth
Artefact scatter, ethnographic
Rockhole, artefact scatter, grinding patches
Artefact scatter, camping residues
Ethnographic, artefact scatter, habitation structure, burial pit
Old sheep yard
Quarry, reduction area, rockshelters
Rockhole, rock-art
Rockshelter with occupation deposit, quarry
Scarred mulga trees
Shelters with rock-art/deposit, open artefact scatter, quarry
Stockyard site
Stone arrangement, artefact scatters
Total
36
Number
%f
5
3
2
2
2
2
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
32
15.6
9.4
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3
6.3
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
3.1
100.0
Figure 1
Mulga tree with ovoid scar and another notch cut below it with a
metal axe. These scarred trees are in close proximity to other trees
that have been cut down to make fence strainers for the nearby
stockyards.
Figure 2
Paintings in red, yellow and white include sinuous meanders, trails of paired tracks and more complex designs
37
Figure 3
Panaramitee-style bird and macropod tracks and geometric
designs. Motifs on horizontal surface are covered with desert
varnish, while these on vertical panels are superimposed with
yellow-painted motifs.
Figure 4
Charcoal and white painting of a man with a gun, on a horse.
Note the nave schema for the horse (stumpy tail, short legs and
large head).
38
Incised grooves
An extensive panel of incised grooves is located at one
of the major rock wells. When the limestone rock well
is full, they would be located just above the water line.
They appear in groups (like tally marks) but otherwise do not appear to form any recognisable motifs
(e.g. bird or kangaroo tracks: see Smith & Rosenfeld
1992). Several of them are positioned beneath mudwasp nests, and are thus potentially dateable (Roberts
et al. 2000).
Shelters with deposit
Of the five shelter locations visited which contained
surface evidence of occupation deposit, only one
seemed to have potential for stratified deposit. All of
the other shelters appeared to have a thin veneer of
deposit perched on bedrock.
Stone arrangements
The stone arrangement recorded by Veth was
inspected. This comprises a series of lines and mounds
of silcrete boulders on the northern flanks of a low
hill. Silcrete occurs naturally around three sides of this
hill, but extensive arranged lines (some dispersed) are
evident on this feature, as is an extensive stone artefact
scatter on the adjacent flats and claypan.
Quarries
The use of natural stone outcrops as sources for
lithic artefact manufacture were observed at several
locations. Veths quarry sites include silcrete and
chalcedony sources. Several additional silcrete quarry
sites were identified across the land where there was
evidence for naturally occurring silcrete and initial
phases of artefact reduction. Low quantities of
finished tools were observed in these vicinities
(Hiscock & Mitchell 1993).
Conclusions reached
There is extensive archaeological evidence, in a range
of site types, across the De Rose Hill claim area. The
patterning inherent in this evidence provides conclusive evidence for the long-term occupation of the
claim area by Aboriginal people, prior to sovereignty.
39
40
41
NOTES
REFERENCES
42
43
44