ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Major Assignment
Archives Assignment – History of a Person
James Brown
Introduction
James Brown was a South Australian pioneer and a leading pastoralist in the 19th century. His
estate established Estcourt House, Kaylra at Belair and the James Brown Memorial Trust
(Document 2.3). The epitaph on his headstone memorialises Brown as ‘a great boon to suffering
humanity’. The material evidence that remains suggests that James Brown was a successful
philanthropist. However, he was also an accused murderer who allegedly massacred between
five and eleven Aboriginals responsible for killing his livestock (Foster et al 2001: 74-93). These
two decidedly discrete identities are represented in different archival documents. This was a
contributing reason as to why James Brown was chosen for this study as the associated archives
and material culture highlight both the use and limitations of particular sources and their
potential for bias.
Aims
The project was decided upon in order to provide a complementary project that accompanied
a research thesis for an Honours degree in Archaeology.
This research thesis is entitled:
Frontier Conflict: A comparison of the archaeological investigation of massacre sites in
Australia and North America. Therefore it was considered that it would be useful to study the
history of an individual involved with an alleged massacre of Indigenous people. This
consideration led to the isolation of the pastoralist James Brown (through the reading of Fatal
Collisions: The South Australian Frontier and Violence of Memory). Brown allegedly
perpetrated atrocities against Aboriginals in the mid 19 th century in South Australia.
In addition to this project being complementary to the honours thesis, this archival research
provides grounding for the students undertaking Australian Historical Archaeology in the
processes involved in discerning details about the past from primary documents. This hopefully
engenders a considered response to the process of interpretation that is undertaken in order to
compile secondary sources. This will hopefully result in the students being better able to
evaluate the processes involved in the compilation of history and consider the nature of the
sources that are being utilised (including their potential uses and limitations).
1
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Furthermore, the archives assignment aims to acquaint students with the necessary skills
involved with the retrieval of archives from South Australia’s major research repositories.
Additionally, material culture can be investigated (if any remains), which hopefully will provide
insight into the link between archival research and archaeology.
Methods
1. An initial consultation with Dr. Alice Gorman was used to establish the best possible
approach to the assignment (on Monday 8 th August, 2005) – it was decided to align this
assignment under the broader topic of the Honours thesis (being massacre sites and frontier
conflict).
2. From this, an attempt to locate records of alleged massacres in South Australia led to the
consultation of Foster et als. Fatal Collisions. It was within this secondary source that the
‘Legend of James Brown’ (2001:74-93) was highlighted.
3. Following this, archival documents (primary sources) and secondary sources were consulted
from the following repositories:
State Library of South Australia
Family History Records
Marriage Index
Census Reports
Death Index
Arrivals
Place Names Register
South Australian Register
Advertiser
Government Gazettes
SA Parliamentary Debates
State Records
Microfiche
(GRG 24/6)
Barr Smith Library
Secondary Sources
Flinders University
Secondary Sources
Internet
Legislation
Secondary Sources
4. After the primary and secondary documents had been found, material culture was
investigated. This includes the photographing of such buildings (associated with James and
Jessie Brown) and his cemetery plot.
2
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Results
The following results, presented as a report were compiled with the use of the evidence
presented in the appendices (primary sources) and a consultation of secondary sources was also
used to confirm details found in archival documents (where referenced).
THE LIFE OF JAMES BROWN
Image 1 - James Brown
(source: Cockburn 1927: 140)
1. Arrival in South Australia
James Brown was born in 1819 (Document 2.1) in East Fife, Scotland (Document 2.3). He
arrived in South Australia on the “Fairfield” on the 4th May 1839, at the age of 20. He appeared
to have been accompanied by his brother – Archibald, who was named after their father
(Document 2.1). The ship departed from Liverpool on the 9th November 1838 and was
commandeered by Captain Abbott. The voyage lasted approximately 175 days. The South
Australian Register reveals that of the 46 passengers on the ship, Archibald and James were
some of the few whom were not traveling with their partners or children (Document 1.2).
The ships manifest details the ships cargo (which included among other things 6 cheeses and
13,000 bricks), but also suggests that the “Fairfield” was cleared on the 13th May 1839 and was
then bound for Manila in the Philippines (Document 1.1: 245 for reference to the Brown
3
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
brothers arrival on the “Fairfield”, Document 1.3).
It was the 17th ship to arrive in Port
Adelaide in that year (see Document 1.4, Appendix 1).
2. Life in South Australia
Little can be ascertained about the life of James Brown outside of his work as a pastoralist,
and the issue of the alleged massacre.
In 1857 he married Jessie Craigie (see Image 2; Document 2.1), a widow and daughter of John
Waddell of Mount Barker. He was 38 years old and she was 31 years old. They were married at
the residence of Reverend R. Haining in Adelaide (Document 2.1, Appendix 2). Cockburn
confirms that Jessie and James Brown had no children (Document 2.3).
Image 2 – Jessie Brown (nee Waddell)
(source: Mortimer, 1990: 2)
James Brown left Australia once throughout the duration of his time as a pastoralist – to visit
San Francisco to secure property (Document 2.3). He was considered a friend of those who
owned the Lake Roy station (in the vicinity of Naracoorte) and later died in their family home
(Document 2.3; Document 5.1). Cockburn shares an anecdote wherein a woman remembered
him as a ‘rough diamond’:
4
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
‘I remember him asking my mother abruptly whether she recollected a certain incident
in the life of King William IV. When she explained that she was only a young girl at the
time, he replied – ‘Oh were you! Well, here is a bag of lollies for you’ (Document 2.3).
Shortly after his arrival in South Australia, James Brown and his brother were recorded in the
Census Data of 1841. They were both recorded as males under the age of 35 in the Encounter
Bay, Inman Valley and Currency Creek area (Document 2.2).
3. Avenue Range Station and Tilley’s Swamp Run
Image 3 – Avenue Range Run (1860)
(source: Mortimer, 1990: 18)
Avenue Range Station was founded by James Brown in 1848 (Document 2.3), and according to
the South Australian Place Names Index was denoted as such due to its location between
‘swamps, flats and stringybark ridges’ (Document 3.1). Avenue Range Run (lease no.200) was
leased until July 1851 (Document 3.1). The Indigenous name for the Avenue Range Run was
‘Kalyra’, a variant being ‘Keilira’ (Mortimer, 1990:19). This was the Indigenous word for ‘HopBush’ and indicates the local vegetation found in the area (Document 3.2).
Avenue Range can be seen in Document 3.6, and the location of Avenue Range Station can be
seen as ‘Keilira’ Station on the Maps marked as Document 3.3 and 3.4. Document 3.3 is derived
from the Department of Environment and Planning’s Heritage Conservation Branch Heritage
5
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Survey of the region. The department proposed that the station be considered for heritage
registration (Department of Environment and Planning 1983:16).
A consultation of the
Australian Heritage Places Inventory reveals that the homestead never received heritage status
on a register (online: Australian Heritage Places Inventory, 2005).
Avenue Range is situated within the modern district council of Lacepede (Department of
Environment and planning 1983: 16).
It no longer intercepts the route from Adelaide to
Melbourne, but in the past it received traffic between the two capital cities and as a result
many of the roads were in very poor condition (Document 2.3). Cockburn discusses the issues
Brown had with overland Bullock traffic and the resulting damage to his fences (Document 2.3).
Avenue Range Run originally consisted of 69 square miles of land and soon expanded to 83
miles. The wool produced by Brown was shipped via Guichen Bay (Document 2.3) and it was
documented that his livestock suffered foot rot due to large amounts of rainfall in the region
(Document 2.3). However at the height of his success Brown was supporting 24,000 sheep.
Tilley’s Swamp Run was located closer to Lacepede bay and was a lesser property than Avenue
Range Station (Document 3.5). It was founded by James Brown and extended his control of
grazing land to 183 square miles. Tilley’s Swamp run could only manage 4,500 sheep, but it was
these two stations that managed to secure James Brown’s status as a leading pastoralist in
South Australia (Document. 2.3).
Further records could be located at the Land’s Titles Office in Adelaide; however financial
constraints did not allow this.
4. Alleged Massacre of Indigenous Australians
Interestingly, Cockburn considers that Brown’s ‘meagre publicity’ despite his reasonable
success (Document 2.3) is a result of his charge of ‘poisoning a blackfellow’ (Document 2.3).
Christina Smith in her account of the Booandik Tribe, written in 1880, describes the story of
the massacre of eleven aboriginals in 1848 as recounted by a youth of the ‘Wattatonga tribe’.
The Wattatonga’s land encompassed the Avenue Range Run (Foster et al. 2001:81). This youth
had escaped the ‘white man’ and then related his story to Christina Smith (1880: 62):
“It appeared from his story the white men had shown no mercy to either the
grey-haired old man or to the helpless infant on its mothers breast…Often
afterwards I have seen the tears of grief run down his sable cheeks, when the
6
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
fate of his parents was spoken of, The cause of this unmerciful step being taken
was the killing by the natives of sheep belonging to a settler in the Guichen Bay
district” (Smith, 1880: 62)
Foster et al claim that this settler of the Guichen Bay district was probably James Brown
(2001:81), but Smith did not incriminate Brown because he was alive in the region at the time
(Foster et al., 2001: 81). This is confirmed by the Supreme Court ‘Criminal Side’ rulings in the
Register on September 29th 1849, which claims that he was ‘charged [with] the murdering [of]
several natives at Guichen Bay’ (Document 4.4).
The murder of these Aboriginal people was undoubtedly enacted as retribution for the killing of
Brown’s flocks (Smith, 1880: 62, Document 4.5). However the exact number and nature of the
death of the Aboriginal people is difficult to ascertain. Cockburn notes only one death, and it
was established through poisoning (Document 2.3). On the 13th of June
and the 12th of
September 1849 the Register notes only the ‘murder of unknown aboriginals’ (Document
4.1;4.3), on the 29th September 1849 The Register claims that he had been charged with the
‘murdering of several natives at Guichen Bay’ (Document 4.4). Mortimer reports that he was
charged with the death of five Aboriginals (1991:19), although this may be confused with
Charles Dwyer’s case (to be discussed, Document 4.6). This is not fitting with Smith’s version
which suggests the killing of eleven Aboriginals (Smith,1880:62). It must be noted however that
Vic Mortimer’s version of events appears to be closely tied to that of Cockburn (Document 2.3).
Foster et al consider that there is much evidence to suggest that the killing was perpetrated by
James Brown and his hut keeper (Foster et al. 2001:81). The Supreme Court records suggest
that Brown shot the Aboriginal people and do not refer to a poisoning (Chief Secretery’s Office
in Foster et al, 2001: 81). Foster et al. argue that this incident may have been the separate
case of Charles Dwyer, whose case was discussed in the South Australian Government Gazette
of 1849 (see Document 4.6). Dwyer punished a group of Aboriginals for stealing flour from his
provisions hut. He laced some flour with arsenic; this flour was stolen by the group, turned into
damper and these actions resulted in the poisoning and death of five Aboriginals (Document
4.6). The case was in the same year as Brown’s and this could explain the potential confusion
and would clarify the inconsistency between this and the later documents (Document 2.3 and
Mortimer, 1990: 19).
So therefore it is more than likely that the cause of death was shooting, Furthermore Document
4.5 also confirms that these people were shot:
7
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
“The story of our natives is a very pathetic one. In one instance many
natives were slaughtered at Keleira. These men had been harassing sheep
flocks. Many years ago I saw large quantities of the bones of those natives
when crossing the swamps were they were shot down” (Clement Smith in
Document 4.5).
However, Clement Smith does not mention the condition of the bones, which appear to have
been burned as a means to reduce any incriminating evidence (Smith, 1880: 62).
It appears to Foster et al. that it is another portion of the massacre event that has held the
foreground in the accounts retelling the incident (2001:84). Brown is oftentimes remembered
more for a feat of ‘equine endurance’ (Document 4.5). Apparently after the massacre (of an
unknown amount of Aboriginal people), James Brown rode a chestnut pony from Avenue Range
station at 10am on one morning to arrive in Adelaide the next morning to report to the police
(Document 4.5).
This myth has clearly been perpetuated as Mortimer states: ‘A great man in the saddle, being
credited with riding a horse from Naracoorte to Adelaide in 24 hours’ (1991:19). Which it must
be noted is incorrect, as he did not ride from Naracoorte, a distance considerably further than
that of Avenue Range.
James Brown was never held accountable for the incident, and the charge was dropped
because there was apparently not enough evidence to support the case. The Register details
the first court appearance on 11th June 1849, where an Aboriginal witness called ‘Lindaw’
appeared before the Supreme Court of South Australia as a witness, however because of a
‘local ordinance of the year 1848, Victoria no.3’ he was unable to submit evidence as it was
considered that Aboriginal people were unable to ‘sanction an oath’ (Document 4.1;4.2). By
September 28th 1848 James Brown had paid his own bail (Document 4.2), but the case was
dropped because of a lack of evidence (Document 4.3).
It is interesting that it is this event that Cockburn considers tainted the image of James Brown
(Document 2.3). All of these events occurred prior to his marriage to Jessie Waddell, and in the
same year as his founding of Avenue Range. It is solely the remarkable benevolence of his wife
that restored his reputation.
8
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Further research into these ‘murders’ could be conducted by locating the Criminal Record
Books of the South Australian Supreme Court. Furthermore, GRG 24/6 at the State Records of
South Australia contains considerable government correspondence that according to Foster et
al. contains valuable references to the supposed event. Furthermore it would be useful to
locate the diary of Christina Smith. This is currently unavailable as PRG 144 is missing from the
Mortlock collection and as a result any information she may have recorded associated with the
massacre is limited to that of her published account in The Booandik Tribe of South Australian
Aborigines (1880).
5. Death
Image 5.1 – Grave marker
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05,
Facing: North-West, Grave Reference: R1S, 3,
W- 5TH,48, West Terrace Cemetery, Adelaide,
Scale = 1.55m)
The records of James Brown’s death include both material culture and archival records. Image
5.1 clearly represents the ostentatious headstone that marks the burial plot for both James and
Jessie Brown.
The first record of James’ death is in the Index of Death Registrations wherein it is suggested
that he died at the age of 70 on the 7th of February 1890 at Glen Osmond (Document 5.1).
However Cockburn claims he died at age 71 (Document 2.3). This agrees with the date of birth
9
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
suggested in his marriage registration (Document 2.1) and the age at death on the Brown
headstone indicates he died in his 72nd Year, which would indicate an age at death of 71 (see
Image 5.2). However, as there appears to be a congruency between the Cockburn information,
Document 2.1 and the grave marker it is most likely that he died at the age of 71.
It is necessary to indicate that further confusion is evident when Vic Mortimer (in his secondary
account) and the West Terrace Cemetery Site Locator also appear to have mistaken the term
72nd year as indicating an age at death of 72 instead of 71 (1990:17; Document 5.2).
Image 5.2 – Epitaph ‘James Brown’
Transcription
SACRED
TO
THE MEMORY OF
JAMES BROWN
LATE OF AVENUE RANGE
SOUTH EAST,
WHO DIED AT GLEN OSMOND
7TH OF FEBRUARY 1890.
IN HIS 72ND YEAR
A Colonist of 51 Years
Life is Real, Life is Earnest,
And the Grave is Not its Goal,
Dust thou Art to Dust Returnest.
Was Not Spoken of the Soul
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05, Grave
Reference: R1S, 3, W- 5TH,48, West Terrace
Cemetery, Adelaide)
Located in the same plot, was his wife, Jessie Brown. Her death is unrecorded in the South
Australian Death Registrations, however this is because her last abode was in North America
(Document 5.2), and this is also indicated on her tombstone (see Image 5.3). She died whilst at
Niagara Falls, which according to Cockburn was during her ‘visiting in company with a niece’
(Document 2.3). She died only two years after the death of James, at the age of 66 (according
to Document 5.2), and her grave marker suggests she died in her 67 th year. The age of 66 (at
her death) is confirmed by calculations made when consulting her wedding registration
information (Document 2.1).
10
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Image 5.3 – Epitaph ‘Jessie Brown’
Transcription
SACRED
TO
THE MEMORY OF
JESSIE BROWN,
WIFE OF JAMES BROWN,
OF WAVERLY, GLEN OSMOND,
WHO DIED AT,
The City of Niagara Falls, U.S.A.
13TH NOVEMBER 1892,
IN HER 67TH YEAR
A Colonist of 53 Years
We Pass the Path that Each Hath Trod
Is Dim, Or Will be Dim with Weeds;
What Fame is Left for Human Deeds
In Endless Age: It Rests with God
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05,
Grave Reference: R1S, 3, W- 5TH,48, West
Terrace Cemetery, Adelaide)
6. The Estate of James Brown
After the death of James Brown, Jessie Brown was left with a considerable inheritance
(Appendix 2.3). According to Mortimer, she outlined in her will the formation of the James
Brown Memorial Trust to be established in honour of her husband (1990:19). The trust was
established by the initial act of parliament the James Brown Memorial Act 1894 (which in 1990
was repealed to establish new powers and the trust now operates as a result of the James
Brown Memorial Incorporation Act 1990). It was announced in the Register on January 20, 1893
that Jessie Brown had passed and £96,000 was left to this trust (Document 6.1). Documents 6.2
and 6.3 detail the early actions of the trust.
This trust established the Kalyra Sanatorium and Estcourt House (Appendix 2.3; see Image 6.1).
This details of this trust were inscribed on the Brown grave marker, followed by an inscription
“A Great Boon to Humanity”.
11
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Image 6.1 – Inscription of Brown Grave
Marker
Transcription
THE KALYRA HOME FOR CONSUMPTIVES AT
BELAIR, AND ESTCOURT HOUSE THE HOME
FOR AGED BLIND AND CRIPPLED CHILDREN
WERE ESTABLISHED OUT OF THE FUNDS
PROVIDED BY THE MUNIFICIENCE OF Mr. &
Mrs. JAMES BROWN.
A Great Boon to Suffering Humanity
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05, Grave
Reference: R1S, 3, W- 5TH,48, West Terrace
Cemetery, Adelaide)
Both, Kalyra and Estcourt House still exist today. Kalyra in Belair (see Image 6.3) operates as a
home for the elderly (James Brown Memorial Trust (online) http://www.jamesbrown.org.au/index.html
[Accessed: 28h October 2005]). However Estcourt House (see Image 6.2) currently is a private
residence. It was run by the James Brown Memorial Trust from 1894-1955 (James Brown
Memorial Trust (online) http://www.jamesbrown.org.au/index.html [Accessed: 28h October 2005]).
12
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Image 6.2 – Estcourt House
Image 6.3 - Kalyra
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 22/10/05, Estcourt
House, Military Road, Tennyson Heights, Adelaide)
(source: James Brown Memorial Trust
(online)
http://www.jamesbrown.org.au/index.html
[Accessed: 28th October 2005].
These facilities were established in remembrance to the memory of the munificence of James
Brown. The details and accounts of the massacre at Avenue Range barely enter the later
biographies of Brown, and it is his benevolence that is recorded. There is a certain degree of
irony in this as he was not involved in the founding of ‘these two great charitable institutions’.
Discussion
The limitations of using documents to research the histories of individual people?
The examination of James Brown’s life through the use of archives, secondary sources and
material culture clearly reveals the limitations of using one particular source of evidence. The
documents that were consulted were predominantly primary sources, but secondary sources
were also used. Documents were useful to discern the history of a person, perhaps more so
than material culture. Furthermore a lot of records pertaining to individual people exist within
the State Library of South Australia and are useful in reconstructing the past of an individual.
The limitation in the use of documents is associated with the limitations associated with
primary and secondary nature of the source.
13
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Secondary sources were useful in the first instance to gather an idea of what primary
documents needed to be consulted to gather further information about James Brown, but they
were also quite limited. On many occasions verification with primary documents was needed to
corroborate certain facts. This occurred mainly with the biographies written by Cockburn and
Vic Mortimer.
The difficulty associated with using secondary sources is that a degree of interpretation has
occurred to produce the final report, and it is challenging to determine how this has occurred
and if it has resulted in errors (Burke & Smith 2004: 168-169). Furthermore the bias of the
author needs to be considered when consulting secondary sources. Bias is clearly evident in
Cockburn’s portrait of James Brown (Document 2.3) whose volume glorified the early pastoral
pioneers. Mortimer’s account similarly contained bias and was a celebratory account of the life
of James Brown.
However in some instances it is easier to determine where interpretation has occurred (as in
Foster et al.). Fatal Collisions founded an argument based on analysis of primary sources and
at each stage of this particular line of reasoning the grounds for their claims were always
clearly established. As a result it is easier to use a text which consults primary documents as it
enables a better understanding to the extent to which bias and agenda is included in the
document.
Primary sources are often better to use in establishing the history of an individual because they
have been removed from the process of interpretation. They are also often recorded close to
the time at which an event or thought has occurred and are first hand accounts (Burke & Smith
2004:168). However a great variety of primary sources would need to be consulted to produce
a veritable history of an individual. Furthermore documents each serve a purpose, and may,
just like secondary sources not be an accurate account, but they are valuable as the lack of
secondary interpretation makes it easier to discern where biases and prejudices have altered
the account of an event or happening.
What kind of people are more visible in the record? Why?
The kind of people that are visible in a particular record is reliant upon the social context of
the area at the time, which in this instance was South-East South Australia during the 1840s1890s. It would be expected that European male settlers would feature most frequently in the
records associated with James Brown, and this proved to be true:
14
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Of the research conducted into James Brown, only two accounts by an Indigenous people were
found (Smith, 1880: 62; Document 4.1). This is surprising considering a decent proportion of
the records dedicated to James Brown are those that deal with his alleged massacre of
Indigenous people.
Furthermore very little of the records are associated with females or his wife Jessie. She
became more prominent after his death and after her death which resulted in the
establishment of the James Brown Memorial Trust. Prior to this the only record of her was
their Marriage Registration in 1857 (Document 2.1).
However, many records include discussion of the local pioneers or the judges involved with his
case (see Appendix 1-6). Therefore the people more commonly found in records of this nature
are European males. The wife as a subsidiary role was only frequently noted in the record after
her husband’s death. Finally Indigenous persons were not largely dealt with in the record
despite a large number of archives being devoted to an alleged massacre of Indigenous people.
Difference in details of the story if just utilising evidence yielded by material remains?
The archival research and associated investigation of material remains reveals the very use of
each form of evidence and the necessity to use the two in concert to garner a more complete
account of past events.
The only material remains accessible to the public associated with James Brown in Adelaide are
his burial plot located in West Terrace Cemetery and both properties established as part of the
James Brown Memorial Trust – Kalyra Sanatorium and Estcourt House. There is also potential
material evidence remaining at Avenue Range, as the Department of Environment and Planning
suggest the ‘Keilira’ Homestead still existed in 1987. However if we just look at what material
culture remains we can consider how useful historical documents are to the discipline of
historical archaeology.
The headstone at West Terrace Cemetery clearly establishes both Jessie and James as “a Great
Boon to Suffering Humanity” (see Image 6.1). If we examine the headstone we can clearly see
Ivy represented (see Image 7.1). As headstones are intended to represent how society ‘should’
remember the deceased, we can then interpret these motifs accordingly. The Ivy, according to
McDougall and Vines represents ‘security/fidelity, loyalty, patience, immortality and bonding’
(2004:3). Therefore we can conclude that James Brown is a reasonably loyal and patient
15
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
individual whose life was deemed worthy enough to have two grand establishments founded in
his honour.
McGuire argues that a grave marker reveals information about status. Brown’s headstone tells
us (as is congruent with the archival record) through its ostentation that he had an achieved
status of some considerable importance (1998:439-480). It is large and prominent; it is also
surrounded by elaborately detailed tiles (see Image 7.2 and 7.3).
Image 7.1 – Visible Motifs
Image 7.2 – Ostentation of grave marker when
compared to surrounding grave markers.
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05, Grave Reference:
R1S, 3, W- 5TH,48, West Terrace Cemetery, Adelaide)
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05, Grave
Reference: R1S, 3, W- 5TH,48, West Terrace Cemetery,
Adelaide)
16
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Image 7.3 – Elaborate Tiles Surrounding Grave Marker
(source: Mirani Litster, taken on: 19/10/05, Grave Reference: R1S,
3, W- 5TH,48, West Terrace Cemetery, Adelaide)
We can also look at the properties his bequest enabled. Estcourt House and Kaylra at Belair
are clearly both expensive properties, and through the inscription on his grave marker we are
aware that they were established as ‘charitable institutions’.
As a result from the material record, we can determine that he was a great philanthropist, who
was loyal and patient and was a man of considerable status. Clearly this disagrees with the
archival record, which supports only parts of these conclusions. He allegedly massacred
Indigenous peoples and it was this event that would negate the notion of his munificence,
loyalty and security. However the material record relatively accurately represent his status as
an individual of reasonable wealth and power (Document 2.3).
17
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Conclusion
It has clearly been established that both primary and secondary sources have both limitations
and uses. In addition to this it has also been determined that it is difficult to rely on only one
type of source. The material record clearly needs to be consulted together with the archival
record (which uses both secondary and primary documents) to ascertain a more comprehensive
version of past events associated with an individual.
18
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Reference List
Legislation
James Brown Memorial Act 1849
James Brown Memorial Incorporation Act 1990
Primary Documents
(see Appendices)
Secondary Sources
Australian Heritage Places Inventory (online) http://www.heritage.gov.au/ahpi/index.html [Accessed: 2
October 2005].
Burke, H & Claire, S. (2004) The Archaeologist’s Field Handbook, Allen & Unwin, Crows Nest.
Cockburn, R. (1927) Pastoral Pioneers of South Australia: Vol II, reprinted from: ‘The Adelaide Stock and
Station Journal’, Publishers Ltd, Adelaide: 140-141.
Foster, R. Rick Hosking and Amanda Nettelbeck. (2001) Fatal Collisions: The South Australian Frontier
and the Violence of Memory, Wakefield Press, Adelaide.
James Brown Memorial Trust (online) http://www.jamesbrown.org.au/index.html [Accessed: 28th
October 2005].
McGuire, R. (1998) ‘ Dialogues with the Dead: Ideology and the Cemetery’ in Recovery of Meaning in
Historical Archaeology, ed. M.P. Leone and P.B. Potter Jr., Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington D.C:
435-380.
Mortimer, V. (1990) The James Brown Memorial Trust: A publication to commemorate the 98th
anniversary of the Trust, Flinders University, Adelaide.
Smith, C. (1880) The Booandik Tribe of South Australian Aborigines: Habits, Customs, Legends and
Language. Also: an account of the efforts made by Mr. & Mrs. James Smith to Christianise and Civilise
them, E. Spiller, Adelaide.
19
ARCH2002: Australian Historical Archaeology
Archives Assignment – The History of James Brown
Mirani Litster (2016376)
Due Date: 31st October 2005
Appendices
Note
All documents are primary sources, except Document 2.3, which was included as it contained
pertinent first hand accounts.
Documents are ordered with an initial number representing appendix number and followed by a
number indicating sequential documents within the appendix.
Appendix
1
2
3
4
5
6
Details
Documents pertaining to James Brown’s
Arrival in South Australia
Documents pertaining to James Brown’s
Life in South Australia
Documents pertaining to Avenue Range
Station and Tilley’s Swamp Run in
South Australia
Documents pertaining to alleged
massacre of Aboriginal people.
Documents pertaining to James Brown’s
death.
Documents pertaining to James Brown
Memorial Trust.
20