Long Island archaeological survey 30 September – 3 October ... › maritime-archaeology-db › sites › default › … · The survey also revealed props from the Grundy ﬁ lm

Long Island archaeological survey 30 September – 3 October 2005

Corioli SouterMatthew Gainsford

Ross Anderson

Report—Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Museum, No. 209.2005

Long Island archaeological survey 2005

2

Contents

Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................................................................Abstract ..................................................................................................................................................................................................Abstract 3Personnel ................................................................................................................................................................................................ 3Historical Background ...........................................................................................................................................................................Historical Background ...........................................................................................................................................................................Historical Background 3Site Description ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 3Classifi cation of Sites:............................................................................................................................................................................ 4Summary of Developments relating to Houtman Abrolhos Long Island Tourist Facility ..................................................................... 4Previous Investigations .......................................................................................................................................................................... 6Overview of Proposed Development .....................................................................................................................................................Overview of Proposed Development .....................................................................................................................................................Overview of Proposed Development 6Legislation .............................................................................................................................................................................................. 7Protected zones ...................................................................................................................................................................................... 8Research Strategy ................................................................................................................................................................................... 9Equipment ..............................................................................................................................................................................................Equipment ..............................................................................................................................................................................................Equipment 9Survey Methodology .............................................................................................................................................................................. 9Survey constraints ................................................................................................................................................................................ 10Results .................................................................................................................................................................................................. 11Table 1: Survey baselines and area covered .......................................................................................................................................Table 1: Survey baselines and area covered .......................................................................................................................................Table 1: Survey baselines and area covered 12Table 2: Artefacts ................................................................................................................................................................................ 12Recommendations ................................................................................................................................................................................ 12Appendix 1 Long Island GIS ............................................................................................................................................................... 16Appendix 2 Long is Survey Data ......................................................................................................................................................... 17Appendix 3: Plan of development ........................................................................................................................................................Appendix 3: Plan of development ........................................................................................................................................................Appendix 3: Plan of development 25Appendix 4: Artefacts previously recovered from Long Island ...........................................................................................................Appendix 4: Artefacts previously recovered from Long Island ...........................................................................................................Appendix 4: Artefacts previously recovered from Long Island 26

Figures

Figure 1: 17th century engraving of Batavia and Wallabi Group .......................................................................................................... 3Figure 2: Aerial of Wallabi Group ......................................................................................................................................................... 4Figure 3: Morning Star weapon found 2001 .......................................................................................................................................... 6Figure 4: Beardman jug sherd found 1967 ............................................................................................................................................ 6Figure 5: The hangings on Long Island (Lucas de Vries) ...................................................................................................................... 8Figure 6: Metal detecting on coral shingle 2005 ................................................................................................................................... 9Figure 7: Operating the DGPS ............................................................................................................................................................. 10Figure 8: Example of metal detacting on vegative cover ....................................................................................................................Figure 8: Example of metal detacting on vegative cover ....................................................................................................................Figure 8: Example of metal detacting on vegative cover 11Figure 9: Square head nail (A6) ........................................................................................................................................................... 13Figure 10: Twist nail (A7) .................................................................................................................................................................... 13Figure 11: Wire nail (A10) ................................................................................................................................................................... 13Figure 12: Ship’s fastening (A11) ........................................................................................................................................................ 13Figure 13: STS Leeuwin sailing past Beacon Is 2 October 2005 ........................................................................................................ 14


3

Abstract Long Island in the Wallabi Group, Houtman Abrolhos has been selected as the site for a proposed nature based tourism operation. The Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Maritime Museum (WAMM) was engaged by MBS Environmental, on behalf of Humfrey Land Developments to conduct a surface survey (visual and metal detection) of the area of impact of the tourism development on Long Island. The objective of this survey was to identify any cultural remains that may relate to the wrecking of the Batavia and subsequent mutiny in 1629.

Personnel Corioli Souter OICMatthew GainsfordRoss Anderson

Historical BackgroundOn 4 June 1629, the VOC ship Batavia was wrecked on Morning Reef in the Wallabi Group of the Houtman Abrolhos (Admiralty Chart AUS 332, Lat. 28º 29’ 30’S, Long. 113 º 48’ 00’E). Approximately 316 men women and children were aboard the ship. Immediately following the shipwreck, 180 persons, among them 30 women and children, were landed on a ‘coral shallow’, later identifi ed as Beacon Island, devoid of fresh water, with some ship’s provisions—barrels of biscuit and water (Drake-Brockman, 1963: 44; 290).

A party of cabin boys, men and women, about 45 in number, were sent to Seals Island (Long Island) on the 28 June 1629 to search for water. An anonymous letter of 11 December 1629 suggests however, that 60 people inhabited Long Island (Dash 2003:375). Seventeen days afterwards, on 15 July 1629, all except ‘seven Boys and some Women’ were murdered (Drake-Brockman, 1963: 159), these subsequently suffering the same fate (Drake-Brockman, 1963: 173) on 21 July 1629. On 18 September 1629, Pelsaert ordered the principal mutineers and other accomplices to be taken to Seals Island for security pending their interrogation on Beacon Island (Drake-Brockman, 1963: 118; 146). Following the confession of their crimes, the condemned mutineers were sentenced to their right hand cut off and in the case of Cornelisz both hands, prior to being put to death on the gallows. Seals Island was the place designated for the execution and this was carried out on 2 October 1629.

Site DescriptionLong Island is a coral island approximately 1600 m long and 180 m at its widest point at the northern extremity. Archival sources record that Seals Island (Long Island) was the location for:

Figure 1. 17th century engaving of Batavia and Wallabi Group from an illustration in the Jan Janz 1647 edition of Ongaluckige Voyagie (Drake-Brockman, 1963:183).


4

(i) Occupation and slaughter site of 45 Batavia survivors(ii) Gallows site of Batavia mutineers(iii) Mutineers’ prison.

Long Island is historically, culturally and archaeologically signifi cant in view of its confi rmed association with the survivors of the wreck of the Batavia. Although few artefacts have been found, the island has never been subjected to close archaeological scrutiny, except for surface exploration for potential occupation sites. No excavation has been undertaken on the island by the Western Australian Museum and the potential for such work remains (Green & Stanbury 1988:10).

Classifi cation of Sites:

1. Occupation site: possibly north end of Long Island, exact location not identifi ed.2. Slaughter site: of Batavia wreck survivors. 3. Gallows site: possibly on the high ridge on the east side of Long Island, exact location not identifi ed. 4. Coral/limestone structure - possibly mutineers’ prison. (Green & Stanbury 1988:10).

Summary of Developments relating to Houtman Abrolhos Long Island Tourist FacilityExcerpt from summary document by Myra StanburyDepartment of Maritime Archaeology WAMM.In 1988 a detailed Tourism and Recreation model with six strategies was presented by the Abrolhos Islands Planning Strategy (AIPS) to accommodate visitation by the public to the Abrolhos Islands (AIPS 1988:23-24). It

Figure 2. Aerial of Wallabi Group


5

was decided that the Abrolhos Islands should not be developed for tourist accommodation at that time and that a review should occur within fi ve to seven years incorporating the detailed criteria. A working party was established in 1994 to advise the Abrolhos Islands Consultative Council (AICC) on how tourism could be accommodated at the Abrolhos Islands with ‘minimal impact to the marine and terrestrial environs and causing minimal confl ict with existing user and interest groups in the area, in particular the commercial fi shing industry’ (AICC 1995:i). The specifi c recommendation with regard to Long Island stated:

Long Island in the Wallabi Group should be considered for the establishment of a low key, low density, land based tourist accommodation facility. Establishment at this site must have minimal impact on the surrounding environs and be subject to strict environmental and heritage guidelines (AICC 1995:18).

In 1994, when the new Fish Resources Management Act was passed by Parliament, the Minister for Fisheries was Fish Resources Management Act was passed by Parliament, the Minister for Fisheries was Fish Resources Management Actgiven specifi c powers to manage the Abrolhos Islands and established the Abrolhos Islands Management Advisory Committee (AIMAC) to coordinate management. In 1997, AIMAC in conjunction with Fisheries Western Australia produced the Draft Management of the Houtman Abrolhos System with input from various stakeholders (including the Western Australian Museum). The report identifi ed a number of strategies with respect to historic and heritage sites and identifi ed the responsible agencies (AIMAC & Fisheries WA 1997:5). The fi nal plan, Management of the Houtman Abrolhos System was published in 1998 (Fisheries WA 1998). Section 6.12 of this plan deals with historic and heritage sites and Section 7.1 with tourism). In February 2001, the Sustainable Plan for the Houtman Abrolhos Islands was produced (Fisheries WA 2001). Long Island was selected for various reasons including its proximity to sites of historic interest associated with the wreck of the Batavia. It was clearly noted that;

Long Island is recognised as a ‘maritime archaeological site’ under the State Maritime Archaeology Act 1973 because of its association with the wreck of the Batavia. The Director of the Western Australian maritime Museum must be consulted about any proposals for the installation of a tourist development on Long Island.

In October 2003, an Inventory of the Land Conservation values of the Houtman Abrolhos Islands was prepared by Fisheries WA (2003). Appendix B outlines the various values associated with specifi c islands, the Conservation Signifi cance, management Implications and Land Access. Long Island is recognised for its ‘historic’ value and its Conservation Signifi cance is rated:

High. Historically signifi cant at a national and international level (Fisheries WA 2001:104)

The management implications are derived from recommendations by Green and Stanbury (1988):

The whole of the island should be protected as a maritime archaeological site under section (1) of the State Maritime Archaeology Act 1973. The island should be declared a protected zone under section 9. (1) of the State Maritime Archaeology Act 1973. Any digging be restricted to bona fi de archaeological researchers with the permission of the Executive Director, WA Museum. No digging and/or major earthworks be undertaken on the island without the approval from the Executive Director (WAM). No metal detecting devices to be used for the purpose of locating archaeological material with[out] approval from the Executive Director (WAM). Visitors should follow code of conduct for visiting historic areas (Stanbury 1991) (Fisheries WA 2001:104).

Also land access recommendations:

Access to the site should be permitted, but suitable markers and notices should be erected in order to make known to the public the management recommendations.


6

In 1999, the Department of Maritime Archaeology (WAMM) in conjunction with Fisheries WA and community groups obtained a Coastwest/Coastcare Grant to undertake further research into the archaeological and historical sites associated with the Batavia and develop a management plan for these sites (see Stanbury, 2000a & b; Souter 2000; Green & Stanbury 2001).

Previous InvestigationsLong Island has not been subject to a thorough archaeological study. The fi rst artefact retrieved and accessioned into the WA Museum was a possible human ankle bone recovered in 1963. Around 1967 ‘a party made two excavations on the northern end of Long Island. After a section of loose coral was cleared to some depth, small rectangular man-made shafts led down to water. This was at fi rst drinkable but soon turned to salt’ (Melrose, 1981: 12). A surface collection and visual survey was undertaken by Colin Jack-Hinton et al from the WA Museum in 1967 and a Rhenish beardman jug sherd was found at the northern end of the island. A piece of lead sheathing moulded into a ball possibly used as a weapon (morning star) and three iron fastenings were recovered by the Museum in 2001 as part of a metal detector survey which covered the northern third of the island. This was the fi rst systematic survey to be undertaken on the island and was done with the support of Prospero Productions as part of a wider project investigating the mass grave excavated on Beacon Island in 1999 and 2001. This survey concentrated on the northern third of the island. With the discovery of material believed to be contemporary with the Batavia mutiny it was recommended that the survey be continued to cover the whole of Long Island. The survey also revealed props from the Grundy fi lm set including a metal costume ring, a costume button and 3 plaster/plastic models of severed hands.

Overview of Proposed Development In December 2004, Geraldton based Humfrey Land Developments was selected by the State Government as the preferred candidate to develop a nature based tourism operation on Long Island. The Department of Fisheries has set aside approximately two hectares of the central portion of Long Island for the tourist development. The proposed facility will accommodate 60 overnight guests within 30 visitor lodges. Guest accommodation will be supported by communal facilities, staff accommodation, swimming pool, sea diving platforms, a deep water jetty, helipad and service and maintenance units. Each guest and staff lodge will be provided with an internal bedroom and shower/toilet facilities. Small guest rotundas and shelters and swimming and diving platforms will be situated around the northern portion of the island and shall be accessed via a raised boardwalk. The development is organised on a north-south axis with all the facilities linked via a network of raised boardwalks across the site. Interconnections of site services are achieved by running all service conduits suspended below the boardwalks. A jetty will be located outside the southern end of the development area taking advantage of the deep water in the bay close to the island’s western shore. A helipad will also be located south of the development area. These facilities will be accessed via a raised boardwalk (MBS Environmental 6:2005). See Appendix 3.

Figure 3. ‘Morning Star’ weapon found 2001. Figure 4. Beardman jug sherd found 1967.


7

Legislation The Batavia shipwreck site and all of its associated relics are protected under the Commonwealth Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976 (HSA 1976). Shipwrecks Act 1976 (HSA 1976). Shipwrecks Act 1976 The State Maritime Archaeology Act, 1973 applies to maritime archaeological sites above the low water mark. Before any intrusive work on Long Island permits are required under both Acts. Permit applications can be made to the delegate:Dr Dawn Casey of the WA Museum.

The relevant sections of these Acts are:

Commonwealth Historic Shipwrecks Act 1976Section 4A(7) The Minister may, by notice in writing published in the Gazette, declare every article (whether or not the existence and location of the article is known) that: (a) was associated with a ship; (b) is situated in Australian waters, or waters above the continental shelf of Australia, adjacent to the coast of a Territory; and (c) either: (i) was associated with the remains of a ship that is at least 75 years old; or (ii) entered waters referred to in paragraph (b) at least 75 years ago; to be a historic relic, and, where such a declaration is made, the declaration extends to every article that, after the making of the declaration, becomes (whether by reason of a shipwreck or otherwise) an article to which paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) apply.

Section 13 Prohibition of certain action in relation to historic shipwrecks and relics (1) A person contravenes this section if: (a) the person engages in conduct; and (b) the conduct: (i) destroys or causes damage to a historic shipwreck or historic relic; or (ii) causes interference with a historic shipwreck or historic relic; or (iii) causes the disposal of a historic shipwreck or historic relic; or (iv) causes a historic shipwreck or historic relic to be removed from Australia (including State waters), from Australian waters or from waters above the continental shelf of Australia. (1A) Subsection (1) does not apply if the person engages in the conduct in accordance with a permit. Note: The defendant bears an evidential burden in relation to the matter in subsection (1A). See subsection 13.3(3) of the Criminal Code. (1B) In subsections (1) and (1A):engage in conduct means: (a) do an act; or (b) omit to perform an act. (2) A reference in subsection (1) to the removal of a historic shipwreck or a historic relic from waters includes a reference to the removal of a historic shipwreck or a historic relic from the sea-bed, or from the subsoil of the sea-bed, beneath those waters or from a reef in those waters. (3) A person who contravenes this section is guilty of an offence and is punishable, on conviction: (a) if the offender is a natural person—by a fi ne not exceeding $10,000 or imprisonment for a period not exceeding 5 years, or both; or (b) if the offender is a body corporate—by a fi ne not exceeding $50,000.(4) In this section, historic shipwreck includes a part of a historic historic shipwreck includes a part of a historic historic shipwreckshipwreck.


8

Section 15 Permits for exploration or recovery of shipwrecks and relics(1) The Minister may, in his or her discretion, upon application by a person, grant a permit to that person authorizing that person and any other persons named or described in the permit to do an act or thing specifi ed in the permit the doing of which would otherwise be prohibited by section 13 or by regulations made for the purposes of section 14. (2) The Minister may, when granting a permit or at any time while a permit is in force, impose conditions in respect of the permit and may at any time revoke or vary any conditions so imposed. (3) The conditions that may be imposed under subsection (2) in respect of a permit authorizing the doing of an act or thing include but are not limited to: (a) a condition requiring the act or thing to be done in a specifi ed manner; (b) a condition requiring the act or thing to be done only in accordance with the directions of a person named or described in the permit as a person empowered to give such directions; and (c) a condition requiring any articles obtained by the doing of an act that is authorized by the permit to be done to be held in such custody or dealt with in such manner as is specifi ed in the permit or as is specifi ed in directions given by a person named or described in the permit as a person empowered to give such directions.

State Maritime Archaeology Act, 1973Under the State Maritime Archaeology Act, 1973, Section 4, a maritime archaeological site - other than the remains of a historic ship (Section 4. 1. a.) - is defi ned as follows:4. (1) (b) any area in which any relic is known to be located, or where in the opinion of the Director unrecovered relics associated with a ship which may have been a historic ship are likely to be located; and4. (1) (c) any structure, camp-site, fortifi cation or other location of historic interest that, in the opinion of the Director, is associated with, and was occupied or used by, persons presumed to have been in a historic ship.

Protected zones9. (1) For the purpose of preventing the plunder, damage or disturbance of maritime archaeological sites, and of the ships, relics, or things vested in the Museum on behalf of the Crown, the Governor may, by an instrument published in the Gazette, declare that an area is a maritime archaeological site and that a specifi ed area surrounding that site is a protected zone, and that zone may be declared to include the waters lying above and the land or bed of the sea below it.9. (4) The declaration of a protected zone shall specify the boundaries of that zone in suffi cient detail to enable them to be established but it shall not be necessary that the boundaries are surveyed or demarcated, and notwithstanding that the boundaries are not demarcated a person may be convicted of an offence against this Act in relation to a protected zone where the court is satisfi ed that the location of that zone could have been established by reference to land marks, leading marks, a buoy or other position marker specifi ed in the declaration, but it shall be a defence to show that the location could not have been so established.

Figure 5. The hangings on Long isand as illustrated in the Lucas de Vries 1649 edition of Ongeluckige Voyagie (Drake-Brockman, 1963:223).


9

Research StrategyThe visual and remote-sensing survey using a metal detector was to cover the area where building was proposed within the Long Island development zone. The purpose was to detect any surface artefacts or sites likely to be related to the Batavia massacre killings and subsequent executions of seven of the Batavia mutineers. The archaeological signatures of these events are reasonably predicted to include small artefacts such as metal buttons or buckles from clothing and belts, lost or discarded weapons eg; morning stars, hatchets, knives, swords, spikes, and possibly iron fastenings from the gallows that are recorded to have been erected on Long Island. These artefacts could lie anywhere on the island (including submerged and below the low water mark) as isolated fi nds, or as a cluster of fi nds.Historical evidence from Pelsaert’s journal does not indicate whether the mutineers were left on the gallows, as was the usual practice of the period. Alternatively the gallows may have been removed and mutineers’ bodies either buried, left on the shore or cast into the sea. The research questions for this survey and Long Island can be summarised as:1. Are there any archaeological sites or artefacts of historical signifi cance in the proposed Long Island development zone?2. Is there any surface archaeological evidence of gallows structures remaining on Long Island? 3. If so is there any archaeological evidence that mutineers were left hanging on the gallows or were they cut down and buried?4. Is there any archaeological evidence of burial sites on Long Island?5. Are there any archaeological sites or artefacts of historical signifi cance remaining on Long Island generally?

In relation to these questions 1–5 neither visual survey nor the use of a metal detector is suitable for detecting buried organic remains such as wood or skeletal material. Organic materials are considered unlikely to have survived if left on the surface, though they may have survived if buried. At this stage the possibility of burial sites in the proposed development zone or elsewhere on Long Island cannot be discounted.

EquipmentMinelab FT16000 Fast Tracker metal detector with Minelab TS1000 ‘Treasure Searcher’ 10’ coil.Leica TCR305 Total Station.Fugro OmniSTAR 8300HP Differential Global Positioning System (DGPS).

Survey MethodologyThe survey methodology was to use a Fugro Omnistar 8300HP DGPS (accurate to within 10 cm in horizontal plane) to accurately fi x all control, transect and anomaly points. However information was provided by Barry Humfrey (Humfrey Land Developments) for existing survey marks on the island CPLI01 (Control Point Long Island 01) and CPLI02 (Control Point Long Island 02). These points were located on Friday 30 September and

Figure 6. Metal detecting on coral shingle 2005.


10

the Total Station was positioned on CPLI02—the northern-most survey mark and in the approximate centre of the proposed development area. The DGPS was used to fi x CPLI02 and the initial Baseline1 start point D1 to orient the Total Station survey, however from this time onwards the Total Station was used exclusively to record all positions (accurate to within <1 cm in horizontal plane).

Using a 100 m fi breglass tape and two 30 m tapes a baseline was laid down. An optical square was used to lay right angle tape transects to mark survey ‘lanes’. As each of the 100 m baseline areas were surveyed the baseline would be moved along the island. In total four 100 m baselines (BL1-4) were laid down. End and centre points of the 100 m baselines (prefi xed with ‘D’ for ‘datum’ eg; D1, D2) were fi xed using the Total Station.

Transect line end points were recorded as e.g.; T1W-T1E (Transect 1 West – Transect 1 East) and their positions fi xed by Total Station. Artefacts or anomalies were recorded as A1, A2 etc.

One person acted as surveyor operating the Total Station to measure in points of the baselines and transects as the survey moved along the island, and to record the positions of any anomalies or artefacts found. Another person operated the metal detector to locate artefacts and the third person operated as a survey assistant communicating with the surveyor using hand-held UHF radio, moving transect tapes and offsetting them accurately using an optical square, and holding the refl ective prism for the Total Station. All personnel interchanged between these roles.

The metal detector operator was required to move along transect lines moving the detector head coil from side to side to cover a 2.5 m transect lane swathe approximately 10 cm above the ground surface. Using the above survey control and this detection method a centimetre square coverage of 100% of the survey area could theoretically be obtained, with an average 10–20 cm overlap between transects to ensure total coverage.

At the end of each day the survey data was downloaded from the Total Station, processed using GeoCalc software (to convert from UTM to Lat/Long coordinates) and imported into Arcview GIS software.

Survey constraintsa) TimeInitially three days was estimated as the minimum necessary to allow coverage of the proposed development area. However, following a late arrival on Friday and a 12 pm departure on Monday the total time was two and a half days.

Figure 7. Operating the DGPS.


11

b) EnvironmentalSandy sections along the high ridge of the island are occupied by nesting shearwaters occupying burrows. It was necessary to move the baselines and transect lines, and operate the metal detector very carefully through these highly sensitive areas in order to avoid treading on and collapsing burrows, thereby slowing the survey process.

Vegetative groundcover (Samphire Halosarcia sp.) around the two tidal saltwater ponds in the centre of the island gave erroneous metal detector readings due to their high salt content. As such these areas were left unsurveyed.

Other vegetation (Myporum, Nitraria billabairdii, Atriplex cinerea sp.) in some areas was so dense, particularly along the highest ridge of Long Island, it was impossible to gain the required distance of 10 cm from the metal detector head coil to the ground. As such, coverage of these areas cannot be regarded as complete. Areas of unvegetated coral rubble that did not contain nesting burrows could be surveyed relatively quickly with100% coverage.

The survey also concentrated as a priority on the proposed development area and as such a full survey of the beaches and their inshore coral rubble ridges was not undertaken.

c) EquipmentThe Minelab FT16000 Fast Tracker metal detector with Minelab TS1000 ‘Treasure Searcher’ 10 inch coil is capable of detecting small buried objects at a range of 10–30 cm. Therefore any small isolated artefact buried at a depth greater than 30 cm, or below a bush greater than 30 cm height could not be detected.

ResultsIn total, four 100 m baselines were laid down and their associated transect areas covered in the two and a half days allowed. The extent of the proposed development residential infrastructure area was covered by the survey, within the limitations described above.

Figure 8. Example of metal detecting on vegetative cover.


12

Table 1: Survey baselines and area covered

Day 2 Sat. 1 October 8 am–5.30 pm BL1 0–100 mBL2 0–50 m

Day 3 Sun. 2 October 8 am–5.45 pm BL2 50–100 mBL3 0–50 m

Day 4 Mon. 3 October 7 am–12.00 pm BL3 50–100 mBL4 0–85 m

Table 2: Artefacts

Artefact/ anomaly number Description

A6 Thin square head ferrous nail

A7 Section of twisted ferrous nail

A10 Small piece of nail or wire

A11 Large bent round-headed ferrous ship’s fastening

Four artefacts that could not be immediately discounted as modern rubbish were position fi xed and recovered. Of these artefacts A11 ship’s fastening is most interesting as its size and context (buried under some coral rubble high up on the ridge) could make it possibly related to the gallows or it may have been used as a weapon. Alternatively it is from a piece of ship-related driftwood. All artefacts were recovered along the top or sloping side of Long Island ridge and brought back to Department of Maritime Archaeology, Fremantle. The metal detector picked up a large amount of modern rubbish that fi lled a garbage bag consisting mainly of aluminium and steel cans, with some small pieces of aluminium foil, steel fi sh-hooks and a copper alloy bar. This rubbish was removed from Long Island and taken back to Geraldton for disposal.

There was no conclusive surface evidence for the gallows or occupation sites within the surveyed construction area on the highest ridge of Long Island, or any obvious Dutch relics.

Recommendations1. Future non-disturbance survey workTotal metal detector coverage of Long Island should be completed. There remains an area south of the proposed development area that could be a potential gallows site, and there is potential for other isolated artefacts or clusters of artefacts to be found elsewhere on the island. The best season for surveying the sandy ridge area should be ascertained to minimise impact on nesting shearwaters and other species. The extent of the tourism development within the southern portion of Long Island will be confi ned to a raised boardwalk located below the unsurveyed ridge on the lower lying coral shingle terraces. The development of a watching brief described in Recommendation 2 will adequately cover the construction of the boardwalk.


13

2. Development watching briefAny development work on Long Island that involves, digging, excavation, vegetation removal etc (eg; putting in foundations or supply/ drainage pipes, clearing pathways) requires a suitably qualifi ed archaeologist to be present on a watching brief.

3. InterpretationAny proposed interpretation for visitors to Long Island should include reference to its cultural heritage values and the relevant protective legislation. Cultural heritage interpretation for the Abrolhos Islands and Long Island should be referred to the Department of Maritime Archaeology at the Western Australian Maritime Museum for input or comment. The Department is willing to assist wherever it can to provide quality textual and visual interpretation materials. Subject to display requirements, the Department of Maritime Archaeology may also support the arrangement for the loan of material from Batavia and Long Island archaeological sites for the proposed interpretation centre.

Figure 12. Ship’s fastening (A11).

Figure 10. Twist nail (A7).


14

4. Management PlanAlong with Beacon Island and West Wallabi Island, Long Island is one of the most signifi cant islands in the Abrolhos Islands’ Wallabi Group for its historical and potential archaeological values. A Management Plan for Long Island should include a specifi c section on cultural heritage, with ongoing management recommendations to be discussed with the Museum and the Commonwealth Department of Environment and Heritage. There remains potential for future archaeological non-disturbance and disturbance (excavation) surveys to contribute to knowledge on the events surrounding the Batavia massacre and executions. Recognition of the potential for future archaeological research should be included in the Management Plan.

References.Abrolhos Islands Consultative Committee 1988 Abrolhos Islands planning strategy: a report prepared by the Abrolhos Islands taskforce for the Abrolhos Islands Consultative Committee. July 1988. Abrolhos Islands Taskforce for the Abrolhos Islands Consultative Committee.

Abrolhos Islands Consultative Council 1995 Tourism at the Abrolhos Islands: fi nal report. Abrolhos Islands Consultative Council, Geraldton WA

Abrolhos Islands Management Advisory Committee, Fisheries Western Australia and Hardy, M., 1997 Management of the Houtman Abrolhos system: draft. Fisheries Management Paper No. 104. Fisheries Western Australia, Perth.

Dash, M., 2003 Batavia’s Graveyard Phoenix, London.Batavia’s Graveyard Phoenix, London.Batavia’s Graveyard

Drake-Brockman, H.,1963 Voyage to disaster: the life of Francisco Pelsaert: covering his Indian report , and the wreck of the ship Batavia in 1629. Angus & Robertson, Sydney.

Fisheries Western Australia & Abrolhos Islands management Advisory Committee, 1998 Management of the Houtman Abrolhos systemFisheries Management Paper No. 117. Fisheries Western Australia, Perth.

Fisheries Western Australia, 2001 Sustainable tourism plan for the Houtman Abrolhos Islands

Fisheries Western Australia, 2004 Outcomes from Abrolhos Islands risk rating workshop for the Land Management Plan, 9 July 2004. Unpublished report. WAMM File MA-6/87.Green, J.N. & Stanbury, M., 1988, Report and Recommendations in the Houtman Abrolhos Report - Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Maritime Museum, No. 29.

Green, J.N. & Stanbury, M., 2001 draft Management Plan for the protection and use of historic shipwreck and associated maritime heritage sites in the Wallabi Group of the Houtman Abrolhos system Report - Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian

Figure 13. Leeuwin sailing past Beacon Is 2 October 2005.


15

Maritime Museum, No. 151.

Green, J.N. & Stanbury, M & Gaastra F. (eds) 1998 The ANCODS Colloquium Special Publication No. 3 Australian National Centre for Excellence for Maritime Archaeology Western Australian Maritime Museum.

Melrose, Bruce, 1981 New Light on Geographical Puzzle, Underwater Explorers Club News, November 1981: 11-16.

Souter, C. 2000 Abrolhos geophysical survey in Stanbury, M., (ed) Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim reportPublication No. 5 Australian National Centre for Excellence for Maritime Archaeology Western Australian Maritime Museum

Stanbury, M., 1991 Historic areas of the Houtman Abrolhos. Code of conduct recommendations for visitors to the Islands. Report - Department of Maritime Archaeology, Western Australian Maritime Museum, No. 44.

Stanbury, M., (ed) 2000a Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Publication No. 5 Australian National Centre for Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Publication No. 5 Australian National Centre for Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim reportExcellence for Maritime Archaeology Western Australian Maritime Museum

Stanbury, M., (ed) 2000b Coastcare: Abrolhos Islands Project 1999. In Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim report Special Abrolhos Islands archaeological sites: Interim reportPublication No. 5 Australian National Centre for Excellence for Maritime Archaeology Western Australian Maritime Museum

WAM File MA-6/87 Site–Abrolhos Islands Land Sites & Management.Western Australia, Department of Fisheries 2003 Inventory of the land conservation values of the Houtman Abrolhos Islands. Fisheries management paper No. 151. Department of Fisheries, Perth.


16

Appendix 1 Long Island GIS


17

Appendix 2 Long is Survey Data

Point ID Latitude Longitude Remarks

CPLI01 -28.473 113.775 Quantam Survey Control Pt

CPLI02 -28.471 113.775 DGPS

D1 -28.469 113.775 Stake, stones and buoys


A1A1 -28.469 113.774 Unknown Anomaly



A4A4 -28.469 113.774 Iron Metal Fastening


A6A6 -28.472 113.774 Iron Square Head Nail: Buried

A7A7 -28.472 113.774 Iron Twist Nail

A8A8 -28.471 113.774 Scattered Wood & Iron

A9A9 -28.471 113.774 Buried Anomaly

A10A10 -28.470 113.774 Iron Wire/ Nail: Buried

A11A11 -28.471 113.774 Iron Fastening: Under Scrub


D1 -28.469 113.774 Northof CP02

D2 -28.470 113.774 Northof CP02

D3 -28.471 113.774 South of CP02

D4 -28.472 113.774 South of CP02

D5 -28.472 113.774 South of CP02

D6 -28.471 113.774 West of CP02

D7 -28.470 113.774 NNW of CP02

D8 -28.470 113.774 NNW of CP02

D9 -28.471 113.774 East of CP02

D10 -28.470 113.774 NNE of CP02

CP02 -28.471 113.774 Control Point


T1E -28.469 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline

T1W -28.469 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline







18
















T11E1 -28.469 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline


T12E1 -28.469 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline










19














T23W1 -28.471 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline














20




























21




























22




























23












EOS1 -28.470 113.774Transect End-point Perpindicular to Baseline
















24

























25

Appendix 3: Plan of Development


26

RE

GN

ON

OIT

EM

SD

ES

CR

IPS

ITE

_LO

CN

OT

ES

Dat

e R

egis

tere

dD

ate

Fou

ndS

econ

dary

Loc

BA

T 3

481

Bon

e: a

nkle

(hu

man

?).

Sea

l Isl

and

(Lon

g Is

.?),

land

.N

.Hai

mso

n. C

an’t

see

11/9

219

63 m

ater

ial

27/0

7/19

7009

/08/

1963

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 3

922

1B

utto

n ?

Long

Isla

nd, N

E e

ndW

AM

M e

xped

ition

23/0

4/20

0120

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 3

923

1Le

ad b

all.

Lead

she

athi

ng

mou

lded

into

bal

l. P

ossi

bly

used

as

a w

eapo

n (c

f ‘m

orni

ng s

tar’

).

Has

squ

are

nail

hole

s in

it, m

ade

afte

r be

ing

mou

lded

into

sha

pe.

Long

Isla

ndW

AM

M e

xped

ition

23/0

4/20

0124

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 8

0440

Iron

spi

keLo

ng Is

land

WA

MM

exp

editi

on23

/04/

2001

24/0

2/20

01H

outm

an A

brol

hos-

Wal

labi

Gro

up

BA

T 8

0441

1Ir

on s

pike

Long

Isla

ndW

AM

M e

xped

ition

23/0

4/20

0124

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 8

0447

1Ir

on n

ail

Long

Isla

ndW

AM

M e

xped

ition

23/0

4/20

0125

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 3

924

5C

oins

. 1 x

2 c

ents

; 3 x

5 c

ents

; 1

x 10

cen

ts. A

ustr

alia

n m

int.

Long

Isla

nd –

met

al d

etec

tor

surv

eyW

AM

M e

xped

ition

23/0

4/20

0123

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 4

740

3M

odel

han

dsLo

ng Is

land

W

AM

M e

xped

ition

Fro

m e

arly

197

0s M

orris

by fi

lm.

23/0

4/20

0121

/02/

2001

Hou

tman

Abr

olho

s- W

alla

bi G

roup

BA

T 4

741

1G

lass

/met

al c

ostu

me

ring

Long

Isla

nd

WA

MM

exp

editi

onF

rom

ear

ly 1

970s

Mor

risby

fi lm

.23

/04/

2001

21/0

2/20

01H

outm

an A

brol

hos-

Wal

labi

Gro

up

Ap

pen

dix

4:

Art

efac

ts p

revi

ou

sly

reco

vere

d f

rom

Lo

ng

Isla

nd

Documents

Long Island archaeological survey 30 September – 3 October ... › maritime-archaeology-db › sites › default › … · The survey also revealed props from the Grundy ﬁ lm