Advertisement

Pursuing the Comparative Analysis of Gold Rush Lives by Tracing Material and Quality-of-Life Trajectories

  • Sarah HayesEmail author
Article

Abstract

The comparative analysis of artifact assemblages is simultaneously enticing and daunting. New research questions can potentially be addressed but a number of limiting factors can hinder the process. The first section of this paper will examine these limitations; the remainder of the paper proposes a model for conducting comparative research via archaeological biography, data mining, and tracing material and quality-of-life trajectories. The model was developed for the Gold Rush Lives project, which seeks to trace how everyday people faired in gold-rush era cities in Victoria, Australia. Drawing from the comparison of two households in Little Lon, Melbourne, the paper will make the case for comparing material trajectories rather than data.

Keywords

Comparative analysis Archaeological biography Quality of life Gold rush Little Lon 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This paper was written as part of an Australian Research Council funded project “An Archaeology of Quality of Life in Victoria’s Gold Rush Era, 1851–1880” (ARC DECRA DE150101203), La Trobe University/Deakin University. It also draws on two earlier Australian Research Council funded projects: “Suburban Archaeology: Approaching the Archaeology of the Middle Class in nineteenth-Century Melbourne” (ARC Discovery DP1093001), La Trobe University, Deakin University and University of Melbourne; and ‘A Historical Archaeology of the Commonwealth Block 1850-1950’ (ARC Linkage LP0989224) La Trobe University and Museum Victoria. Many thanks to all the staff involved on each of these projects and to Museum Victoria and Heritage Victoria for access to their collections. The majority of the research presented here was undertaken at La Trobe University and I thank the staff in Archaeology and History for their support, particularly Tim Murray and Susan Lawrence. Sincere thanks to Noriaki Sato for discussions on the theoretical and methodological aspects of this paper. Edwina Kay conducted a literature search for this paper (funded by La Trobe University and Deakin University).

References

  1. Adams, N. M. (2010). Perspectives on data mining. International Journal of Market Research 52(1): 11–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Adams, W. H. and Boling, S. J. (2000). Status and ceramics for planters and slaves on three Georgia coastal plantations. In Brauner, D. R. (ed.), Approaches to Material Culture Research for Historical Archaeologists. 2nd ed. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, MD, pp. 111–138.Google Scholar
  3. Allen, J. (1973). The archaeology of nineteenth-century British imperialism: an Australian case study. World Archaeology 5(1): 44–60.Google Scholar
  4. Barile, K. S. and Brandon, J. C. (2004). Household Chores and Household Choices: Theorizing the Domestic Sphere in Historical Archaeology. University of Alabama Press, Tuscaloosa.Google Scholar
  5. Beaudry, M. C. and Mehler, N. (2016). The material culture of the modern world. Post-Medieval Archaeology 50(1): 108–120.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Beranek, C. M. (2009). Beyond consumption: social relationships, material culture, and identity. In White, C. L. (ed.), The Materiality of Individuality: Archaeological Studies of Individual Lives. Springer, New York, pp. 163–183.Google Scholar
  7. Blanton, R. E. (1994). Houses and Households: A Comparative Study. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  8. Brooks, A. (2002). The cloud of unknowing: Towards and international comparative analysis of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century ceramics. Australasian Historical Archaeology 20: 48–57.Google Scholar
  9. Brooks, A. (2003). Crossing Offa’s Dyke: British ideologies and late eighteenth- and nineteenth-century ceramics in Wales. In Lawrence, S. (ed.), Archaeologies of the British: Explorations of Identity in the United Kingdom and its Colonies 1600–1945. Taylor and Francis, London, pp. 119–137.Google Scholar
  10. Brooks, A. (2005a). An Archaeological Guide to British Ceramics in Australia 1788–1901. Australasian Society for Historical Archaeology and the La Trobe University Archaeology Program, Sydney.Google Scholar
  11. Brooks, A. (2005b). Observing formalities: the use of functional artefact categories in Australian historical archaeology. Australasian Historical Archaeology 23: 7–14.Google Scholar
  12. Brooks, A., Bader, H.-D., and Lawrence, S. (2009). Ploughzone archaeology on an Australian historic site: a case study from South Gippsland, Victoria. Australian Archaeology 68(1): 37–44.Google Scholar
  13. Burke, H., Morrison, M., and Claire, S. (2017). The Archaeologist’s Field Handbook. Allen and Unwin, Crows Nest.Google Scholar
  14. Casey, M. (2005). Material culture and the construction of hierarchy at the conservatorium site, Sydney. Australasian Historical Archaeology 23: 97–113.Google Scholar
  15. Cessford, C. (2014). Assemblage biography and the life course: an archaeologically materialized temporality of Richard and Sarah Hopkins. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 18(4): 555–590.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cessford, C., Hall, A., Herring, V. (2017). "To Clapham’s I go": a mid to late 18th-century Cambridge coffeehouse assemblage. Post-Medieval Archaeology 51(2): 372–426.Google Scholar
  17. Childs, S. T. and Corcoran, E. (2000). Managing Archaeological Collections: Technical Assistance. Archaeology and Ethnography Program, National Parks Service. (https://www.nps.gov/archeology/collections/;accessed July 2018).
  18. Connah, G. (2003). Problem orientation in Australian historical archaeology. Historical Archaeology 37(1): 146–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Crook, P. (2008). "Superior Quality": Exploring the Nature of Cost, Quality and Value in Historical Archaeology. Doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  20. Crook, P. (2011). Rethinking assemblage analysis: new approaches to the archaeology of working-class neighborhoods. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 15(4): 582–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Crook, P. and Murray, T. (2004). The analysis of cesspit deposits from the Rocks, Sydney. Australasian Historical Archaeology 22: 44–56.Google Scholar
  22. Crook, P., Lawrence, S., and Gibbs, M. (2002). The role of artefact catalogues in Australian historical archaeology: a framework for discussion. Australasian Historical Archaeology 20: 26–38.Google Scholar
  23. Crook, P., Laila, E., and Murray, T. (2005). Keeping up with the McNamaras: A Historical Archaeological Study of the Cumberland and Gloucester Streets Site, The Rocks, Sydney. Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales, Sydney.Google Scholar
  24. Davies, P. (2001). Isolation and Integration: The Archaeology and History of an Otways Forest Community. Doctoral dissertation, La Trobe University, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  25. Davies, P. (2006). Henry’s Mill: The Historical Archaeology of a Forest Community: Life around a Timber Mill in South-West Victoria, Australia, in the Early Twentieth Century. Archaeopress, Oxford.Google Scholar
  26. Davies, P. and Parker, G. (2016). Cities in the modern world. Post-Medieval Archaeology 50(1): 53–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Davies, P., Crook, P., and Murray, T. (2013). An Archaeology of Institutional Confinement: The Hyde Park Barracks, 1848–1886. Sydney University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
  28. Deetz, J. (1995). Flowerdew Hundred: The Archaeology of a Virginia Plantation, 1619–1864. University of Virginia Press, Charlottesville.Google Scholar
  29. Delgado, J. P. (2009). Gold Rush Port: The Maritime Archaeology of San Francisco’s Waterfront. University of California Press, Berkeley.Google Scholar
  30. Delle, J. A., Mrozowski, S. A., and Paynter, R. (eds.,) (2000). Lines that Divide: Historical Archaeologies of Race, Class and Gender. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.Google Scholar
  31. Ellis, A. and Woff, B. (2018). Bottle merchants at A’Beckett Street, Melbourne (1875–1914): new evidence for the light industrial trade of bottle washing. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 22(1): 6–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Flexner, J. L. (2014). Historical archaeology, contact, and colonialism in Oceania. Journal of Archaeological Research 22(1): 43–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Garver, L. N. (2015). Tea and ethnicity in Southeastern Pennsylvania: a transatlantic perspective on German American consumption. Historical Archaeology 49(4): 30–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Gerrard, R. H. (2014). Practices in archaeological stratigraphy. In Harris, E. C., Brown, M. R., Brown, G. J. (eds.), Beyond Crossmends: Stratigraphic Analysis and the Content of Historic Artefact Assemblages on Urban Sites. Elsevier Science, Kent, pp. 229–249.Google Scholar
  35. Gibbs, M. (2005). Editorial. Australasian Historical Archaeology 23: 3–5.Google Scholar
  36. Gibbs, M. (2010). Landscapes of redemption: tracing the path of a convict miner in Western Australia. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 14(4): 593–613.Google Scholar
  37. Gilchrist, R. (2000). Archaeological biographies: realizing human lifecycles, −courses and -histories. World Archaeology 31(3): 325–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Glassie, H. (1975). Folk Housing in Middle Virginia: A Structural Analysis of Historic Artifacts. University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville.Google Scholar
  39. González-Tennant, E. (2011). Creating a diasporic archaeology of Chinese migration: tentative steps across four continents. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 15(3): 509–532.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Gosden, C. and Marshall, Y. (1999). The cultural biography of objects. World Archaeology 31(2): 169–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Gregory, D. and Licence, T. (2017). Historic global commodity networks: the research potential of rubbish dumps for the study of rural household market access during the late Nineteenth and early Twentieth Centuries. Rural History: Economy, Society, Culture 28(2): 161–175.Google Scholar
  42. Groover, M. D. (2001). Linking artifact assemblages to household cycles: an example from the Gibbs site. Historical Archaeology 35(4): 38–57.Google Scholar
  43. Hayes, S. (2007). Consumer practice at Viewbank Homestead. Australasian Historical Archaeology 25: 87–103.Google Scholar
  44. Hayes, S. (2011a). A Historical Archaeology of the Commonwealth Block 1850–1950: Artefact Processing Project Report. La Trobe University and Museum Victoria, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  45. Hayes, S. (2011b). Amalgamation of archaeological assemblages: experiences from the Commonwealth Block project, Melbourne. Australian Archaeology 73: 13–24.Google Scholar
  46. Hayes, S. (2014). Good Taste, Fashion, Luxury: A Genteel Melbourne Family and their Rubbish. Sydney University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
  47. Hayes, S. (2018). A golden opportunity: Mayor Smith and Melbourne’s emergence as a global city. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 22(1): 100–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Hayes, S. and Minchinton, B. (2016). Melbourne’s waste management history and cesspit formation processes: evidence from Little Lon. Australian Archaeology 82(1): 12–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Hayes, S. and Minchinton, B. (in press). Diversity and change in Little Lon: ongoing historical and archaeological research. In Murray, T., Mackay, R., and McCarthy, J. (eds.), Little Lon: An Historical Archaeology. Sydney University Press, Sydney.Google Scholar
  50. Higginbotham, E. (2010). Say it with assemblages: a simple method for comparing sites. Australasian Historical Archaeology 28: 43–60.Google Scholar
  51. Hodge, C. J. (2009). Widow Pratt’s possessions: individuality and Georgianization in Newport, Rhode Island. In White, C. L. (ed.), The Materiality of Individuality: Archaeological Studies of Individual Lives. Springer, New York, pp. 185–205.Google Scholar
  52. Hourani, P. (1990). Spatial organisation and the status of women in nineteenth century Australia. Australian Historical Archaeology 8: 70–77.Google Scholar
  53. Hull, K. L. (2016). Concerns at home, concerns abroad: Irish and English political ephemera in Southern Ontario. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20(4): 768–780.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Jeffries, N., Owens, A., and Hicks, D. (2009). Rematerialising metropolitan histories?: people, places and things in modern London. In Horning, A. and Palmer, M. (eds.), Crossing Paths or Sharing Tracks?: Future Directions in the Archaeological Study of Post-1550 Britain and Ireland. Boydell and Brewer, Woodbridge, pp. 323–350.Google Scholar
  55. Jeffries, N., Featherby, R., and Wroe-Brown, R. (2014). "Would I were in an alehouse in London!": a finds assemblage sealed by the Great Fire from Rood Lane, City of London. Post-Medieval Archaeology 48(2): 261–284.Google Scholar
  56. Karskens, G. (1997). The Rocks: Life in Early Sydney. Melbourne University Press, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  57. Karskens, G. (2001). Small things, big pictures: new perspectives from the archaeology of Sydney’s Rocks neighbourhood. In Mayne, A. and Murray, T. (eds.), The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 69–85.Google Scholar
  58. Karskens, G. and Lawrence, S. (2003). The archaeology of cities: what is it we want to know? In Murray, T. (ed.), Exploring the Modern City: Recent Approaches to Urban History and Archaeology. Historic Houses Trust of New South Wales in association with La Trobe University, Sydney, pp. 89–111.Google Scholar
  59. Karskens, G. (2006). Making city lives: urban archaeology and Australian social, cultural and urban history. In Green, A. and Leech, R. (eds). Cities in the World, 1500–2000: Papers given at the Conference of the Society for Post-Medieval Archaeology, April 2002. Maney, Leeds, pp. 269–79.Google Scholar
  60. Kay, E. (2015). Containment of "wayward" females: the buildings of Abbotsford Convent, Victoria. Archaeology in Oceania 50(3): 153–161.Google Scholar
  61. Kent, S. (1990). Domestic Architecture and the Use of Space: An Interdisciplinary Cross-Cultural Study. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
  62. Lawrence, S. (2003). Exporting culture: archaeology and the nineteenth-century British Empire. Historical Archaeology 37(1): 20–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Lawrence, S. and Davies, P. (2011). An Archaeology of Australia since 1788. Springer, New York.Google Scholar
  64. Lawrence, S. and Davies, P. (2018). Melbourne: the archaeology of a world city. International Journal of Historical Archaeology: 1–14.Google Scholar
  65. Leadbeater, B. (2018). South Australian Pioneer Families: Old colonist arrivals, births and marriages, <http://www.familyhistorysa.org//colonists.html>; accessed November 2018.
  66. Lucas, G. and Hreiðarsdóttir, E. (2012). The archaeology of capitalism in Iceland: the view from Viðey. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 16(3): 604–621.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  67. Lydon, J. (1993). Task differentiation in historical archaeology: sewing as material culture. In du Cros, H. and Smith, L. (eds.), Women in Archaeology: A Feminist Critique. Australian National University, Canberra, pp. 129–133.Google Scholar
  68. Martin, A. (2018). Homeplace is also workplace: another look at Lucy Foster in Andover, Massachusetts. Historical Archaeology: 1–13.Google Scholar
  69. Mayne, A. (2006). Big notes from a little street: historical research at Melbourne’s "Little Lon." International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10(4): 311–322.Google Scholar
  70. Mayne, A., Murray, T., and Lawrence, S. (2000). Melbourne’s "Little Lon." Australian Historical Studies 31(114): 131–151.Google Scholar
  71. Mazrim, R. (2013). Consumer practices and the visibility of identity in Antebellum St. Louis: a 1,200-vessel archaeological sample from an Irish and German neighborhood, 1845–65. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 17(4): 684–712.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. McCalman, J. (2005). Richmond. In Brown-May, A. and Swain, S. (eds.), The Encyclopedia of Melbourne. Cambridge University Press, Melbourne, pp. 604–605.Google Scholar
  73. McCarthy, J. P. and Ward, J. (2000). Sanitation practices, depositional processes, and interpretive contexts of Minneapolis privies. Historical Archaeology 31(1): 111–129.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  74. McGuire, D. C. (2016). A taste for mustard: an archaeological examination of a condiment and its bottles from a loyalist homestead in Upper Canada. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20(4): 666–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Mitchell, P. (2018). Concentration camp buildings as artifacts: the archaeology of buildings in the Mauthausen-Gusen Complex. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 22(3): 553–573.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Mrozowski, S. A. (2006). The Archaeology of Class in Urban America. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
  77. Mullins, P. R. (1999). Race and Affluence: An Archaeology of African America and Consumer Culture. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  78. Murphy, K. J. (2013). Under the boards: archaeological site formation processes at the Commissariat Store, Brisbane. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 17(3): 546–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Murray, T. (2006). Integrating archaeology and history at the "Commonwealth Block": "Little Lon" and Casselden Place. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 10(4): 395–413.Google Scholar
  80. Murray, T. (2013). Expanding horizons in the archaeology of the modern city: a tale in six projects. Journal of Urban History 39(5): 848–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  81. Murray, T. and Crook, P. (2005). Exploring the archaeology of the modern city: issues of scale, integration and complexity. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9(2): 89–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Murray, T., Crook, P., and Ellmoos, L. (2003). Understanding the Archaeology of the Modern City. In Murray, T. (ed.), Exploring the Modern City: Recent Approaches to Urban History and Archaeology, Historic Houses Trust of NSW in association with the Archaeology Program. La Trobe University, Sydney, pp. 113–135.Google Scholar
  83. Murray, T., Crook, P., and Ellmoos, L. (2008). Exploring the Archaeology of the Modern City Publications. https://www.latrobe.edu.au/humanities/research/research-projects/past-projects/archaeology-of-the-modern-city/publications (accessed July 2018).
  84. Murray, T. and Mayne, A. (2001). Imaginary landscapes: reading Melbourne’s "Little Lon." In Mayne, A. and Murray, T. (eds.), The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 89–105.Google Scholar
  85. Mytum, H. (2010a). Ways of writing in post-medieval and historical archaeology: introducing biography. Post-Medieval Archaeology 44(2): 237–254.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. Mytum, H. (2010b). Biographies of projects, people and places: archaeologists and William and Martha Harries at Henllys Farm, Pembrokeshire. Post-Medieval Archaeology 44(2): 294–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  87. Pal, J. K. (2011). Usefulness and applications of data mining in extracting information from different perspectives. Annals of Library and Information Studies 58: 7–16.Google Scholar
  88. Parker, G. (2013). Complexity and diversity: domestic material culture and French immigrant identity in early modern London. Post-Medieval Archaeology 47(1): 66–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  89. Pastron, A. G. and Hattori, E. M. (1990). The Hoff Store Site and Gold Rush Merchandise from San Francisco, California. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, MD.Google Scholar
  90. Pearce, J. (2000). A late 18th-century inn clearance assemblage from Uxbridge, Middlesex. Post-Medieval Archaeology 34(1): 144–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  91. Pearce, J. and Taylor, R. (2013). The stock-in-trade of a parish scavenger: an 18th-century community reflected in refuse from excavations at 9 and 11 Duke Street, London. Post-Medieval Archaeology 47(2): 281–322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  92. Petchey, P. (2004). The Dunedin Causeway: Archaeological Investigations at the Wall Street Mall Site, George Street, Dunedin. Dunedin City Council, Dunedin, NZ.Google Scholar
  93. Porcasi, J. F. (2016). Persistence of traditional lifeways by early Chinese immigrants: faunal evidence from the high lung laundry (CA-SBA-2752H) Santa Barbara, California. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 21(3): 558–576.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Potter, P. B. (1991). What is the use of plantation archaeology? Historical Archaeology 25(3): 94–107.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  95. Praetzellis, A. and Praetzellis, M. (1992). Faces and facades: Victorian ideology in early Sacramento. In Yentsch, A. E. and Beaudry, M. C. (eds.), The Art and Mystery of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of James Deetz. CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL, pp. 75–99.Google Scholar
  96. Praetzellis, A. and Praetzellis, M. (2011). Beyond stories: a quantitative approach to the archaeology of households, neighborhoods, and cities. In Beaudry, M. C. and Symonds, J. (eds.) Interpreting the Early Modern World. Springer, New York, pp. 45–61.Google Scholar
  97. Praetzellis, A., Praetzellis, M., and Brown, III, M. (1987). Artifacts as symbols of identity: an example from Sacramento’s Gold Rush Era Chinese community. In Staski, E. (ed.), Living in Cities: Current Research in Urban Archaeology. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, MD, pp. 38–47.Google Scholar
  98. Prossor, L., Lawrence, S., Brooks, A. and Lennon, J. (2012). Household archaeology, lifecycles and status in a nineteenth-century Australian coastal community. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 16(4): 809-827.Google Scholar
  99. Reilly, M. C. (2016). Poor white’ recollections and artifact reuse in Barbados: considerations for Archaeologies of poverty. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20(2): 318–340.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. Renfrew, C. and Bahn, P. (2013). Archaeology: The Key Concepts. Taylor and Francis, Hoboken, NJ.Google Scholar
  101. Ricardi, P. (2018). Working-class consumer behavior in "Marvellous Melbourne" and Buenos Aires, the "Paris of South America." International Journal of Historical Archaeology 22(1): 131–146.Google Scholar
  102. Rodriguez, A. C. and Brooks, A. (2012). Speaking in Spanish, eating in English: ideology and meaning in nineteenth-century British transfer prints in Barcelona, Anzoategui State, Venezuela. Historical Archaeology 46(3): 47–62.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Ross, D. E. (2011). Factors influencing the dining habits of Japanese and Chinese migrants at a British Columbia salmon cannery. Historical Archaeology 45(2): 68–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  104. Rotman, D. (2005). Newlyweds, young families, and spinsters: a consideration of developmental cycle in historical archaeologies of gender. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 9(1): 1–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Samson, D. (1990). The Social Archaeology of Houses. Edinburgh University Press, Edinburgh.Google Scholar
  106. Schacht, I. (2008). Determining Research Significance in Archaeological Collections from Historic Sites. Doctoral dissertation. Deakin University, Melbourne.Google Scholar
  107. Schiffer, M. B. (1987). Formation Processes of the Archaeological Record. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque.Google Scholar
  108. Smith, C. H. F. and Hayes, S. (2010). Managing the Commonwealth Block archaeological assemblage: an Australian case study. Collections: A Journal for Museum and Archives Professionals 6(3): 171–187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Sneddon, A. (2006). Seeing slums through rose-coloured glasses: the Mountain Street site, Sydney and its limitations in the search for vanished slum communities. Australian Archaeology 63: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. Spencer-Wood, S. (ed.) (1987). Consumer Choice in Historical Archaeology. Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  111. Staniforth, M. (1995). Dependent colonies: the importation of material culture into the Australian colonies (1788-1850). In Johnston, P. F. (ed.), Underwater Archaeology: Proceedings from the Society for Historical Archaeology Conference. Society for Historical Archaeology, Germantown, MD, pp. 159–164.Google Scholar
  112. Staniforth, M. (2003). Material Culture and Consumer Society: Dependent Colonies in Colonial Australia. Kluwer Academic/Plenum, New York.Google Scholar
  113. Symonds, J. (2011a). Stooping to pick up stones: a reflection on urban archaeology. In Beaudry, M. C. and Symonds, J. (eds.), Interpreting the Early Modern World. Springer, New York, pp. 63–84.Google Scholar
  114. Symonds, J. (2011b). The poverty trap: or, why poverty is not about the individual. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 15(4): 563–571.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  115. Tuffin, R., Gibbs, M., Roberts, D., Maxwell-Stewart, H., Roe, D., Steele, J., Hood, S., and Godfrey, B. (2018). Landscapes of production and punishment: convict labor in the Australian context. Journal of Social Archaeology 18(1): 50–76.Google Scholar
  116. Van Buren, M. and Gensmer, K. A. (2017). Crib girls and clients in the red-light district of Ouray, Colorado: class, gender, and dress. Historical Archaeology 51(2): 218–239.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  117. Van Oosten, R. (2017). Cesspits and the P-P-P-P-problem: The pitfall of the Pompeii premise and the palimpsest. Quaternary International 460(Supplement C): 22–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  118. Venovcevs, A. (2016). Playing with fire: children at Fort York’s ordnance and supply yard. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20(4): 705–719.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  119. Voss, B. L. (2012). Curation as research: a case study in orphaned and underreported archaeological collections. Archaeological Dialogues 19(2): 145–169.Google Scholar
  120. Voss, B. L., Wong Kwock, A., Young Yu, C., Gong-Guy, L., Bray, A., and Kane, M. S. (2013). Market Street Chinatown archaeology project: ten years of community-based, collaborative research on San Jose’s historic Chinese community. Chinese America: History and Perspectives 12: 63–74.Google Scholar
  121. Walker, J., Beaudry, M., and Wall, D. D. (2011). Poverty in depth: a new dialogue. International Journal of Historical Archaeology 15(4): 629–636.Google Scholar
  122. Wall, D. D. (1992). Sacred dinners and secular teas: constructing domesticity in mid-19th-century New York. Historical Archaeology 25: 69–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  123. Wheeler, K. (2000). Theoretical and methodological considerations for excavating privies. Historical Archaeology 34(1): 3–19.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  124. Whitehead, S. and Casella, E. C. (2011). Mrs. Perrin's "Tranklements": community life and class distinction in (post)industrial-era Cheshire. In Beaudry, M. and Symonds, J. (eds.), Interpreting the Early Modern World: Transatlantic Perspectives, Springer, New York, pp. 177–95.Google Scholar
  125. Woods, N. (2013). Artefacts and neighbourhood transformations: a material culture study of nineteenth-century North Dunedin. Australasian Historical Archaeology 31: 60–67.Google Scholar
  126. Wooler, F. (2015). The excavation of 19th-century back-to-back housing and courts and the Kenyon Cutlery Works at the site of the Stephenson Blake-Type Foundry, Upper Allen Street, Kenyon Alley and Edward Street, Sheffield. Post-Medieval Archaeology 49(2): 313–333.Google Scholar
  127. Yamin, R. (2001). Alternative narratives: respectability at New York’s five points. In Mayne, A. and Murray, T. (eds.), The Archaeology of Urban Landscapes: Explorations in Slumland. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 154–170.Google Scholar

Archival Sources

  1. The Age 21 June 1872Google Scholar
  2. The Age 5 August 1901Google Scholar
  3. The Argus 31 October 1857Google Scholar
  4. The Argus 15 March 1866Google Scholar
  5. The Argus 8 January 1890Google Scholar

Births, Deaths and Marriages Records

  1. VIC Deaths: 1856, 2336; 1859, 267; 1867, 5186; 1868, 3573; 1875, 8309; 1878, 9253; 1882, 6157; 1885, 2195; 1886, 6112; 1889, 13027; 1889, 5313027; 1892, 7284; 1902, 8623; 1915, 6431Google Scholar
  2. VIC Marriages: 1856, 2336; 1864, 2841Google Scholar

Public Records Office of Victoria

  1. Henry Cornwell’s Will and Probate records: VPRS 28 P/3 Unit 598; VPRS 7591 P/2 Unit 539; VPRS 460 P/0 Unit 2311 File 23656Google Scholar
  2. John Moloney’s Will and Probate records: VPRS 28 P/0 Unit 386; 28 P/2 Unit 200; 7591 P/2 Unit 112Google Scholar
  3. John Moloney’s conveyance document: VPRS 460 P/1 Unit 287 File 46082 Conveyance 18 October 1854Google Scholar
  4. Patrick Neylan’s Will and Probate Records: VPRS 28 P/0 Unit 978/638, 5/718Google Scholar
  5. Margaret Neylan’s Will and Probate Records: VPRS 28 P/0 Unit 1022Google Scholar

Other

  1. Baptism 4 August 1833, Parish West Hackney, County Middlesex, England p.39Google Scholar
  2. Victorian Electoral Rolls, Melbourne Ports, 1919 no. 920Google Scholar
  3. Victorian Electoral Rolls 1903–1980Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Alfred Deakin Institute for Citizenship and GlobalisationDeakin UniversityBurwoodAustralia

Personalised recommendations