Insert Cover Heading here
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY FOR THE HOSPITAL AT

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY THE HOSPITALBY TERRA ROSA CONSULTING | PREPARED FOR DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING, LANDS AND HERITAGE
OCTOBER 2020

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|1|

CONTENTS
1

INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 5
PURPOSE ............................................................................................................................................... 5
BACKGROUND AND SITE LOCATION ...................................................................................................... 5
SCOPE OF STRATEGY......................................................................................................................... 5
HERITAGE LISTINGS .......................................................................................................................... 7
KEY DOCUMENTS .............................................................................................................................. 7
AUTHORS .......................................................................................................................................... 7
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS..................................................................................................................... 82

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT ................................................................................. 9
PHASE ONE – CONSTRUCTION AND HOSPITAL............................................................................... 11
PHASE TWO – WOMEN’S PRISON................................................................................................... 12
PHASE THREE – INVALID DEPOT ..................................................................................................... 13
PHASE FOUR – HOSPITAL ................................................................................................................ 14
PHASE FIVE – POST CLOSURE AND CHILDREN’S LITERATURE CENTRE ........................................... 15

3

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE SITE ..................................................................................................... 17
PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY .............................................................................................................. 17
ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL ....................................................................................................... 17
ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE .................................................................................................. 20
RESEARCH QUESTIONS ................................................................................................................... 22
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES ............................................................................ 23
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS ............................................................. 26
BIBLIOGRAPHY .................................................................................................................................... 27
APPENDICES ........................................................................................................................................ 29
APPENDIX A – PROJECT CONTACTS ................................................................................................ 30
APPENDIX B – ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY ............................................................................ 31
APPENDIX C – PRICING SCHEDULE.................................................................................................. 32
COPYRIGHT ..................................................................................................................................... 34
DISCLAIMER .................................................................................................................................... 34
VERSION CONTROL ......................................................................................................................... 34

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|2|

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 - Location of the Hospital within Fremantle Prison, showing the surrounding area. ................. 6
Figure 2 – Sequence of Development, DAR Studio, 2020....................................................................... 10
Figure 3 - 1859 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990 ......................................... 11
Figure 4 - 1889 Women's Prison Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990 ............................ 12
Figure 5 - 1903 Invalid Depot Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990 ................................. 13
Figure 6 - 1946 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990 ......................................... 14
Figure 7 - 1990 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990 ......................................... 15
Figure 8 - 2020 Floor Plan, DAR Studio, 2020 ......................................................................................... 16
Figure 9: Areas of exceptional archaeological significance, DAR Studio, 2020 ...................................... 21

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|3|

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|4|

1

INTRODUCTIONPURPOSEThe Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage (DPLH) has engaged Terra Rosa Consulting (Terra
Rosa) to develop an Archaeology Management Strategy (AMS) for the Hospital at Fremantle Prison(the Hospital). The Hospital is a highly significant structure within the World Heritage Site of theFremantle Prison. Built between 1857 and 1859, the Hospital is one of key Fremantle Prison buildings
constructed by convict labour and demonstrates five phases of occupation all of which contribute tothe overall significance of the building and have the potential to yield archaeological material fromthose periods.
Fremantle Prison intend to undertake conservation works to the Hospital building which include theinsertion of a breathing strip around the perimeter of the building within the boundary of the existing
verandah, remove damaged plaster, and the removal of concrete slabs below timber floorboards inthe interior of the building. These conservation works will potentially impact on any archaeologicalmaterial below these surfaces.
The purpose of an AMS is to provide practical strategies for the management of the archaeologicalcomponents of a place (Heritage Council 2019: 2). The aim of this AMS is to draw on the previously
identified strategies and recommendations outlined in the Hospital Conservation Management
Strategy 2020 by Dar Studio, to assess the proposed conservation works and determine how they will
potentially impact any archaeological deposits at the Hospital.

BACKGROUND AND SITE LOCATIONThe Hospital at Fremantle Prison is located at 1 The Terrace, Fremantle Western Australia on Crown
Land Reserve 2404. The prison site is bounded by Knutsford Street to the north, Hampton Road to theeast, Fothergill Street to the south and Fairbairn Terrace to the west.
The Hospital is situated in the northeast corner of the Fremantle Prison on an area of high groundwhich overlooks the New Division to the west and the Main cell Block to the southwest. The area
immediately surrounding the building is characterised by open areas to the north and east, with lawn
and garden beds to the west. The building is surrounded by the external prison walls to the north andeast and an internal boundary fence to the west and south.

SCOPE OF STRATEGYThe DPLH has commissioned the Archaeological Management Strategy (AMS) to identify strategies tomanage potential impacts from the proposed conservation works outlined in the Conservation
Management Strategy (2020). The AMS is concerned with the potential impact of the proposed
conservation works and provides strategies to manage potential impacts and any archaeologicalmaterial encountered.
The AMS is aligned with the principles of the Australian ICOMOS Burra Charter (2013) and theArchaeological Management Strategy guidelines published by the Heritage Council of Western
Australian in 2019. The AMS is informed by the guiding documents of the Fremantle Prison Heritage
Management Plan 2019 and the Hospital Conservation Management Strategy 2020.
The methodology used in this AMS is primarily a desktop assessment, with a site visit undertaken on 5
October 2020. The AMS provides an overview of the legislative frameworks governing the site,
historical background and phases of occupation noting the key changes to the physical layout andoriginal fabric of the building, an assessment of archaeological potential and significance, andprovides strategies to manage the potential impact on the archaeology of the place during the
proposed conservation works. A definition of the terminology used is provided in Appendix B.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|5|

Figure 1 - Location of the Hospital within Fremantle Prison, showing the surrounding area.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|6|

HERITAGE LISTINGSThe Hospital as part of the Fremantle Prison is recognised and registered by four tiers of heritagelegislation: world, national, state, and local, as well as non-statutory heritage listings as shown in
Table 1 below.
Register / Listing

Name

Statutory Listing
World Heritage List

Australian Convict Sites Serial Listing, 1 August
2010.

National heritage List

Fremantle Prison (Former), including Fairbairn
Street Ramp and Warder’s Cottages (Ref:105762), 1 August 2005.

WA State Register of Heritage Places

Fremantle Prison, excludes Fairbairn Street
Ramp and Warder’s Cottages (Ref: P1014), 30
June 1995.

City of Fremantle Local Heritage List

Fremantle Prison (Ref: 1014) and West End
Conservation Area (Ref: 22601), 8 March 2007.
Municipal Inventory, Category 1A – 18
September 2000.

Non Statutory Listing
Classified by the National Trust (WA)

3 October 1960.

Register of the National Estate

21 March 1978.

KEY DOCUMENTS
This AMS has been prepared with reference to the following key documents:•

Fremantle Prison Conservation and Future Use, Archaeological Zoning Plan of the Prison
Compound (Bavin, 1990)•

Fremantle Prison Conservation & Future Use (Building Management Authority of Western
Australia, 1990)•

Conservation Management Strategy the Hospital (DAR Studio 2020)•

Fremantle Prison Heritage Management Plan, (Extent Heritage Pty Ltd and Lovell Chen, 2019).

•

Archaeological Management Strategies (Heritage Council, 2019)

AUTHORS
Preparation of this AMS has been undertaken by:•

Jade O’Brien•

Fabienne Jose•

Megan Tehnas

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|7|

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Preparation of this AMS has benefited from the assistance of the following personnel:•

Daniel Holland, Kellie Fleming and Janine Symons from the Department of Planning, Lands andHeritage•

Courtenay Heldt from the Fremantle Prison•

Anne Golden and Ben Fordyce from Terra Rosa Consulting

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|8|

2

HISTORICAL BACKGROUND AND CONTEXT

The area of Fremantle / Walyalup is situated within the traditional lands of the Whadjuk Noongar
people (Whadjuk People Native Title claim area WC2011/009) with Fremantle holding particularsignificance due to its location near both the Swan River / Derbal Yerrigan and the Indian Ocean. Prior
to European settlement Fremantle was a place of trading and cultural practices for the Whadjuk
people (City of Fremantle 2020).
Following settlement of the Swan River Colony in 1829, the small settler population meant that there
was a shortage of labour and convict labour was requested from the Colonial Office. By 1850 the firstconvicts arrived on the Scindian and a site for the convict establishment was selected. The prison was
subsequently designed by Captain Henderson, comptroller of the Swan River Colony (Campbell 2011:
1.5).
Construction of the Fremantle Convict Establishment began in 1852 and the main building campaign
included the entry, housing for guards and administrators, the Main Cell Block, and perimeter walls.
Further buildings, including the Hospital, guard room, and carpenter shop were constructed from1857 using convict labour (Campbell 2011: 7.6).
Prior to the construction of the Hospital building which is the subject of this AMS, a temporary
structure had been built on the foreshore at Fremantle, however once construction of the Fremantle
Prison began, a temporary hospital was relocated to the Wooden Division on the South Knoll (Garrick& Jeffrey 1987: 25), above the Parade Ground.
The site of the current Hospital is situated in the northeast corner of Fremantle Prison, isolated fromthe main buildings. The hospital was deliberately separated to not only ensure isolation from theMain Cell Block but also to take advantage of the highest point of the site and the perceived benefitsof the sea air for health.
The use of the Hospital building can be separated into five phases of occupation which impacted boththe physical fabric of the building and its significance. The full sequence of construction is provided infigure 2, below.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL|9|

Figure 2 – Sequence of Development, DAR Studio, 2020
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 10 |

PHASE ONE – CONSTRUCTION AND HOSPITAL
Constructed from 1857 to 1859, the Hospital was designed by the Royal Engineers, with the original
design being amended to include additional wards and single patient rooms. The completed building
consisted of a single storey limestone building with an H pattern layout, a verandah wrapping aroundthe northern, southern, and western aspects, and separate hip and verandah roof lines (BMA 1990).
The single storey, domestic scale of the Hospital contrasted sharply with the dominating form of themain prison buildings. Opened in December 1859, the Hospital consisted of a general ward for 30
patients, separate fever and ophthalmic wards for 10 patients, four observation wards for single
patients, two skin diseases wards - capable of holding three patients each, and facilities including a
kitchen, bathroom, medical store, warder’s store, surgery, and toilets (see Figure 3).
For the next 30 years the Hospital remained relatively unchanged and continued to treat convicts aswell as the personnel associated with the Fremantle Prison including warders and administration
staff.

Figure 3 - 1859 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 11 |

PHASE TWO – WOMEN’S PRISON
In 1865, the British Government declared that convict transportation to Western Australia wouldcease in 1868 and as such the Fremantle Convict Establishment was renamed Fremantle Prison in
1867. By 1886, the management of the place was transferred to the Western Australian Colonial
Administration (BMA 1990). At this time, the hospital facilities were relocated to the Main Cell Blockand the Hospital building was repurposed for use as a Women’s Prison. It is not known whether thealterations undertaken in 1885 to create additional individual cells in the general ward of the Hospitalbuilding were commenced in preparation for the female inmates, or to facilitate segregation for the
existing inmates.
The use of the Hospital building as a Women’s Prison was brief, with a new, purpose-built Women’s
Division being assembled from existing buildings at the site in 1889. During the three years as the
Women’s Prison, an additional bathroom was added to the southeast corner of the building, however
the exact year is not known (see Figure 4).

Figure 4 - 1889 Women's Prison Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 12 |

PHASE THREE – INVALID DEPOT
Following the short period of use as a Women’s Prison, the Hospital building was again repurposed asan Invalid Depot in 1889. Invalids consisted of released prisoners - both psychiatric patients, and any
former inmates incapable of earning their own living after completing their sentence. To facilitate theaccommodation of invalids who were free men and the separation of inmates from the invalid
patients both internal and external alterations were required (Fremantle Prison 2009).
Alterations included a wall around the perimeter of the Hospital building, internal renovations
including the removal of individual cells in the general ward constructed for the Women’s Prison andan opening created in the external wall of the prison so that access was separate from the main
prison building.
While the use of the Hospital building as the Invalid Depot ceased in 1903, a number of internal
alterations had been made that year including division of the general and isolation wards, an external
door added to the southern side of the ward and front steps to the west.
In the final iteration of the Hospital, plans from 1990 show the 1940s additions on the eastern side of
the building had been conjoined and the morgue divided into wards and activity space. In the generalward a toilet and store were added to the northern and southern corners (see Figure 5).
From 1903 onwards the Hospital continued to operate as the prison hospital until the prison’s closurein 1991; however, towards the end of this time, patients with serious illnesses were treated at the
nearby Fremantle Hospital (BMA 1990).

Figure 5 - 1903 Invalid Depot Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 13 |

PHASE FOUR – HOSPITAL
Following the granting of Responsible Government and Federation in 1901 there was a Royal
Commission into the penal system relating to the living conditions of the prisoners. As a result, issues
were raised with keeping invalids who were free men within the bounds of the prison. As such, in
1903 the invalids were relocated to the Old Men’s Home in Fremantle, and the building was returned
to its original use as the Prison Hospital (BMA 1990).
In 1903 the Hospital building was in poor physical condition and a number of works were undertaken
to enable the building to once again be used as a Hospital. The works included the demolition of theoriginal 1859 fabric on the eastern side of the building which consisted of the cells and toilets, and thedemolition of the late 1880s-bathroom extension on the southeast side (see Figure 5). As well as thedemolition, the separate hip and verandah roof lines were replaced with a continuous roof, theverandah was extended, and much of the building including plaster and window surrounds wererenewed.
Also, at this time the New Division building and radial exercise yard were constructed to the west of
the Hospital building, and while it did not directly impact the Hospital it affected the isolated natureof the place.
During the Second World War, Fremantle Prison was occupied by the Australian Army and utilised as
an internment facility for Italian nationals and in 1946 there were further changes to the hospitalbuilding which included the installation of a water tank and construction of a store, toilets, andmorgue on the eastern side of the building, as well as the removal of the steps on the western side(see Figure 6).

Figure 6 - 1946 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 14 |

PHASE FIVE – POST CLOSURE AND CHILDREN’S LITERATURE CENTRE
A combination of the increasing need for updated prison facilities, and the 1988 riot and fire, led tothe closure of Fremantle Prison in 1991. As early as 1960 the National Trust of Western Australia hadrecognised the heritage significance of the place and this was further supported in 1978 when it wasadded to the Register of the National Estate (now closed). Such recognition had prompted the needto investigate and manage the conservation and potential future uses of the prison following its
closure. In 1992 the place received statutory protection when it was added to the State Register of
Heritage Places.
In 1992 Fremantle Prison also opened as a cultural heritage tourism site, while the former Hospitalbuilding was adaptively reused for educational purposes as Fremantle’s Children’s Literature Centre in
1993, a use which continues to this day. In order to repurpose the building for use as the Literature
Centre minor repairs, repainting and removal of non-significant fabric was undertaken, however the
layout and fabric of the building remains much the same as it was in 1990 prior to the closure of theprison (see Figure 7 and Figure 8).

Figure 7 - 1990 Hospital Floor Plan, Building Management Authority, 1990

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 15 |

Figure 8 - 2020 Floor Plan, DAR Studio, 2020
The Fremantle Prison site gained further recognition of its heritage values when it was added to the
National Heritage List in 2005 and world acclaim in 2010 as the only Western Australian cultural
heritage site included the Australian Convict Sites serial listing on the World Heritage List.
Today, the Fremantle Prison continues to operate as a key tourism site, educating visitors andproviding insight into the history and heritage of the place.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 16 |

3

ARCHAEOLOGY OF THE SITE

PREVIOUS ARCHAEOLOGY
From 1990 there have been a number of archaeological excavations and studies undertaken atFremantle Prison including Bavin (1990), Mcllroy (1990), Western Australian Museum (1993), Nayton(1998), Eureka Archaeological Research and Consulting UWA (2005), and Eureka ArchaeologicalResearch and Consulting (2009). Except for Bavin (1990), who devised an archaeological zoning planfor the entire Fremantle Prison, none of the previous excavations were concerned with Hospital. The
five-year ‘Fremantle Prison Project’ was also inaugurated in 2013 by UWA archaeological students
and staff for archaeological investigation of the site (Winter & Whitely 2015). While Bavin categorised
the building as Zone C, having little to no areas of archaeological sensitivity, there was no
consideration made to underfloor deposits and the potential to recover cultural material from there(Bavin 1990).

ARCHAEOLOGICAL POTENTIAL
The archaeological potential of the Hospital is determined by a variety of factors including site
formation processes and the type of archaeology present.

SITE FORMATION PROCESSES
There are three processes that should be considered in determining the archaeological potential of
the Hospital: sub-surface deposit accumulation, deliberate caching of objects, and the cumulative
impacts of progressive works at the site.
Firstly, it is important to consider the accumulation of sub-floor deposits over time. The Hospitalbuilding is likely to retain its original floors, though whether they are butt-joined or tongue-andgroove floorboards was not able to be discerned during the site inspection. However, it is likely thatthe original 1857 building floors were butt-joined as tongue-and-groove flooring was not invented
until c. 1880s (Casey 2004: 34). Because butt-joined floorboards are not interlocked, but are instead
fitted closely side-by-side, under-floor deposits are able to form across the entire sub-floor space
where there are gaps in the floorboards – particularly where gaps form when the boards warp andcontract following wear, and where knots in the wood shrink and fall out. One high-profile excavation
highlighting this was the CSR Pyrmont site in New South Wales (Casey 2004). Here, the excavated subfloor deposits seven domestic buildings were analysed, and it was suggested that the likely presenceof floor coverings such as carpets (and later linoleum), as well as the introduction of tongue-andgroove floorboards post-1880s would limit deposition (ibid.:34). However, recent research by Winteret al (2020) on twelve historic Western Australian sites (including the Fremantle Prison (1855),
Fremantle Lunatic Asylum (1862), and Fremantle Artillery Drill Hall (1895), indicates that deposition
through tongue-and-groove floorboards is still possible as the floorboards are damaged over time(see also Winter and Romano 2019: 334). Mein’s 2012 honours research at the Fremantle Prison is
also of note, indicating that there was a significant invertebrate ecology that existed in the sub-floor
spaces both on the ground and between floors contributing to the accumulated deposits (p. 73-74).
In the case of the prison it is likely that materials have been deliberately concealed both under thefloor and within the walls. Studies of underfloor deposits from prisons and institutions such as
asylums show that caching behaviour is common, and inmates and patients would sometimes go to
great lengths to hide objects which were of importance to them (Winter et al, 2020). During theperiod in which the Hospital was built, the deliberate, ritual concealment of objects in building
structures by site construction workers was also practiced across Australia, including in Western
Australia (Evans 2010; Burke et al. 2016)). These rituals are believed to have their origins in 13th
Century Britain to which items such as shoes, garments, dead cats, and children’s toys are concealed
mostly within the subfloor, but also in voids near doorways, windows, and chimneys (Evans 2010:132- 138). Evans posits that the location of such concealments may be due to a fear of spiritual
danger posed by these spaces, as ones in which evil spirits could occupy. Evidence for these practices
in Australia appear to have occurred from European settlement in 1788 and continued until the 1930s
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 17 |

(ibid.: 177), and Evans identified 18 sites within Western Australia that contained ritually concealed
objects in their subfloor spaces, including two in Fremantle and one in nearby Beaconsfield (ibid.: 138;376-399). As such, it may be possible that the Hospital building contains objects that have been
similarly concealed beneath its floors, either by inmates and invalids, or by the convict labourers who
built the structure from 1957.
Finally, the alterations to the building need to be considered. As stated in the Fremantle Prison
Collection Significance Assessment, there has been limited cultural material recovered that dates tothe late 1800s to early 1900s. Given that the Hospital was occupied during this period and majoralterations were undertaken during this time there is potential to recover material which cancontribute to the understanding of this period (Heritage TODAY 2017: 65). However, it must be notedthat it is extremely likely that the cumulative works on the building will have also disturbed or
destroyed some archaeological material.
There are areas of interest associated with the different phases of occupation and have the potential
to reveal archaeological deposits which can yield information about the place.

Exterior
Southeast section of the building:•

Removal of the verandah and the addition of a bathroom in 1889 when the building was utilised
as the Women’s Prison.

•

Removal of the 1889 bathroom addition and reinstallation of the verandah in 1903 when thebuilding was utilised as the Invalid Depot.

All sections•

Widening of the verandah in 1903 when the building was utilised as the Invalid Depot.

Interior
All rooms•

During each phase of occupation, the interior of the building underwent minor alterations andchange of use.

•

Original 1857 floorboards are likely to have resulted in the deposition of materials (see above).

Although there have been many alterations to the building, the Hospital has the following
archaeological potential as shown in Table 4 below.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 18 |

Table 1: Archaeological potential of the Hospital
Location

Possible archaeological evidence

Integrity of remains

Archaeologicalpotential

Wholebuilding

Small sized artefacts (such as
buttons, pins, coins) located under
the floors which have slipped
between floorboards.

Localised disturbanceassociated withreplacement of flooring,
services, and vermin
activity.

Moderate HighDisturbance associated withthe reinstatement andextension of the verandah in
1903.

Moderate

Localised disturbanceassociated withreplacement of flooring,
services, and vermin
activity.

High

Localised disturbanceassociated withreplacement of flooring,
services, and vermin
activity.

High

Deliberately cached larger objects
within the sub-floor and otherbuilding voids.
Artefacts associated with all phasesof occupation.
1889
Bathroom
addition

Remains of the addition on thesouthern side of the building.

Centralward

Artefacts located under the floors.

Room G7(see figure
9).

Artefacts located under the floors.

Small artefacts associated with
Women’s Prison and Invalid Depot.
Artefacts deliberately concealed inwall voids and in the sub-floor
space.

Artefacts deliberately concealed inwall voids and in the sub-floor
space.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 19 |

ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE
The significance of the Fremantle Prison including the Hospital has been thoroughly establishedthrough multi-level heritage listings. The significance of the Hospital as an individual building wasarticulated in the 2020 Conservation Management Strategy as shown in Table 3 below.
Table 2: Statement of Significance•The Hospital clearly demonstrates in its fabric the system and conditions in which theconvicts lived and received medical treatment, and the perceived need to separate andsegregate sick prisoners. It demonstrates the primary importance of having onsite medicalcare for convicts, which was essential to maintaining a healthy and strong workforce for theconstruction of public works projects;•

The Hospital is an important element of the surviving physical evidence of the imperial
convict public works establishment and provides evidence of its subsequent adaptation forcolonial and state use, and later as a cultural heritage site. It contributes to the exceptionallyintact architectural ensemble of Fremantle Prison;•

The Hospital is one of the oldest purpose-built hospitals in Western Australia;•

The Hospital is significant for its use as Fremantle Prison’s first women’s prison from 1886 to
1889, and its use as an Invalid Depot for a period from 1889 to 1903;•

The Hospital has extensive research potential because of its high degree of integrity andauthenticity, which in combination with documentary evidence, collections, oral traditions,and archaeological features, has the ability to provide unique insights into the health andmedical care of convict and subsequent prisoners through colonial and state prison
administration;•

As a cultural heritage site open to the public, the Hospital has the potential to educate andcommunicate information about convict history and the provision of healthcare; and•The Hospital is the only domestic type of building in the prison compound and isdistinguished by its elevated position and relatively simple yet functional planning including
its wide verandahs (no other of the 1850s Prison buildings originally had verandahs). The
open garden on the west side and the stone concrete steps on the south west are also
distinguishing features;

Generally, the entire Hospital holds considerable archaeological significance, though there are threeareas that could be considered to hold exceptional significance as they have the most potential toinform and add to the understanding of place.
Archaeological investigation of these features has potential to uncover evidence that will further
current understandings of the Hospital site’ history and use.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 20 |

Figure 9: Areas of exceptional archaeological significance, DAR Studio, 2020
ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 21 |

Plate 1: - Southeast section of verandah, F. Jose, 2020

RESEARCH QUESTIONS
Based on the archaeological significance and potential for archaeological deposits, the Hospital has thepotential to reveal information about several historic themes including:•

Living conditions of convicts at the Hospital during the 1800s•

Gender relations and activities in the Women’s Prison•

Living conditions of Invalid patients during the early 1900s•

Domestic scale construction techniques from the 1850s•

Evolution of health care from the 1850s to 1990s

Within the framework of those themes, archaeological research questions could include:•

What can the archaeological evidence tell us about the Hospital’s inhabitants (in terms of socioeconomic groups, race, religion and nationalities);•

What can the archaeological evidence tell us about the living conditions within the Hospital(diet, medicines, personal effects);•

Is there archaeological evidence of the former bathroom extension on the south of the building;•What does the archaeological record tell us about the phases and alterations made to the
Hospital building;•What can the archaeological evidence tell us about the use of verandahs (in terms of activities,
uses by patients and staff), considering that no other 1850s prison buildings included verandahs.

•

Can the archaeological evidence identify evidence of internship during World War II?

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 22 |

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGIESThe following strategies form the basis of general archaeological management at the site.

1. Awareness of archaeological potential
During conservations works all contractors working on the site should be made aware of the highpotential for archaeological materials to exist both under the floor and within the walls – particularlyaround exterior openings such as doorways, windows, and chimneys.

2. Archaeological investigation
Where works are likely to impact areas of archaeological potential, this disturbance should beundertaken in conjunction with archaeological investigation and recording. This would include a visualinspection, photographs, and a written record.
Based on the results and impacts of the work the below strategies may be employed.
3.

Archaeological investigation of the walls

Where disturbance of areas of archaeological potential is proposed, this disturbance should beundertaken in conjunction with archaeological investigation and recording. This would include a visualinspection of the walls, photographs taken and the removal of any objects from the walls. The
removal process would include a record of the location the objects, a description of the object and its
location. This would include in situ photographs of the objects and further photographs of the object
once it has been removed.
4.

Archaeological excavation

Archaeologists should excavate sub-floor deposits following Casey’s (2004) gridded methodology(p.29-30) where possible. As it is unlikely for these areas to have clear stratigraphy due to theaccumulation of dust and the potential effects of insect activity, the project areas should be
excavated as a grid, with each grid point removed by shovel and bagged. The bagged excavateddeposits should be finely sieved, and all recovered artefacts should be cleaned, labelled, and stored ina manner appropriate for their particular requirements (e.g. metal, organics, fabric, etc.).

5. Post-Excavation Management
Upon completion of an archaeological excavation the following should be undertaken:•

Post excavation analysis of artefacts – Any artefacts recovered should be analysed andresearched to determine whether they can contribute to the understanding of the Hospital andaddress the proposed research questions. Prior to commencing this work, it should be decided
whether the artefacts may be moved offsite, or if a location at the prison can be made available
for this analysis.

•

Prioritise management of archaeological material – Appropriate management of archaeologicalmaterial should be given high priority in the management of the Hospital’s heritage values.

•

Conservation and storage of artefacts – Fremantle Prison is responsible for the conservationand storage of artefacts recovered from the site unless alternative arrangements are made prior
to the commencement of works.

•

Interpretation – An interpretation strategy should be developed for any artefacts recoveredfrom the site, including whether they are displayed on site, or within the Fremantle Prison to aid
in public engagement and education.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 23 |

Plate 2: Location of bathrooms in 1889 Women’s Prison, F. Jose, 2020

For the conservation works specific to the brief, table 4 outlines the proposed archaeological works.
Table 3: Management strategies relating to conservation works
Scope of Work

ArchaeologicalPotential

Proposed Archaeological Works

Strip out –fixtures andfinishes

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Walls –
structural
repairs

Moderate

Archaeological investigations of any potential caches.

Walls - external
render repairs

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Paint removal

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Walls, quoining
and surrounds render finish

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Timber floor
repairs

High

Test pitting to confirm likelihood of underfloor
archaeological deposits. Archaeological excavation ofunderfloor where debris is being removed.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 24 |

Scope of Work

ArchaeologicalPotential

Proposed Archaeological Works

Removal of
concrete floors

High

Test pitting to confirm likelihood of underfloor
archaeological deposits. Archaeological excavation ofunderfloor if removal is required, otherwise leave in
situ.

Joinery Repairs

None

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Rainwater
Goods – general
works

None

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Rainwater
Goods –
installation of
soakaway

Low to Moderate

Archaeological investigation if materials identified.

Timber window
and doors

Low to moderate

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

New air drain

Low to moderate

Except for the area of exceptional archaeologicalsignificance: None – contractors to contact
archaeologists if archaeological materials identified.
Over the area of exceptional archaeologicalsignificance: archaeological investigation after theremoval of concrete.

Paint scrapes

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Painting

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Verandah
PaversLow

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

Wall Vents

Low

None – contractors to contact archaeologists if
archaeological materials identified.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 25 |

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT RECOMMENDATIONS
Based on the information presented in the Archaeological Management Strategy, Terra Rosa havedeveloped the following recommendations to assist Fremantle Prison with the management of theheritage significance and archaeological potential of the Hospital.
Recommendations
Fremantle Prison is advised that care should be taken during the removal of the floors.
As the timber floor structure and verandah slab are considered to be of exceptional andconsiderable significance, all effort should be made to limit the destruction of thisoriginal fabric during the proposed works.
Further, there is likely to be archaeological material in the underfloor deposit and limiting
the impact to this sub-floor increases the likelihood of an intact deposition.
Underfloor areas should be investigated by an archaeological team.
Following the removal of the concrete slabs or any wooden floorboards, it isrecommended that an archaeologist investigates the underfloor areas. If any
archaeological materials are present, the area should be excavated and recorded, andany artefacts salvaged.
Any areas where archaeological materials are identified during works should be
investigated by an archaeologist.
During the course of the conservation works, should any archaeological material beidentified, the works should stop and allow an archaeological investigation to take place.
Upon completion of the investigation, any further works should be discussed.
Any artefacts found should be archaeologically salvaged.
Due to the potential for artefacts to inform the understanding of the Hospital andcontribute to the proposed research questions, any artefacts found should be recorded
and salvaged for post excavation analysis.
These will be analysed onsite unless other arrangements are made.
Fremantle Prison is advised that they are responsible for any artefacts found during the
proposed conservation works.
Fremantle Prison are responsible for the conservation and storage of artefacts recoveredfrom the site unless alternative arrangements are made prior to the commencement ofworks.
Following the proposed conservation works, an interpretation strategy should be
developed for any artefacts found.
An interpretation strategy should be developed for any artefacts found during the
proposed conservation works. This strategy should consideration the public engagement
and educational opportunities of displaying the artefacts on site or within Fremantle
Prison.

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 26 |

BIBLIOGRAPHY
Australia ICOMOS 2013, The Burra Charter: The Australia ICOMOS charter for places of cultural
significance 2013, viewed 08 September 2020, http://australia.icomos.org/wpcontent/uploads/The-Burra-Charter-2013-Adopted-31.10.2013.pdf
Bavin, L.J 1990, Fremantle Prison Conservation and Future Use, Archaeological Zoning Plan of the Prison
Compound, University of Western Australia.
Building Management Authority of Western Australia, 1990, Fremantle Prison Conservation & Future
Use.
Burke, H, Arthure, S, and De Leiuen, C, 2016, ‘A context for concealment: the historical archaeology offolk ritual and superstition in Australia’, International Journal of Historical Archaeology 20: 45–
72.
Campbell, R. M. 2011, Building the Fremantle Convict Establishment, Thesis, The University of Western
Australia.
Casey, M, 2004, ‘Falling through the cracks: method and practice at the CSR Site, Pyrmont’, AustralasianHistorical Archaeology 22: 27–43.
CityofFremantle,
2020,
Aboriginal
history,
viewed14
September
https://www.fremantle.wa.gov.au/council/about-cityfremantle/aboriginal-history

2020,

Dar Studio, Conservation Management Strategy the Hospital, prepared for the Department of Planning,Lands and Heritage, June 2020
Evans, I, 2010, Touching Magic – Deliberately concealed objects in old Australian houses and buildings,
PhD Thesis, University of Newcastle, NSW.
Extent Heritage Pty Ltd and Lovell Chen, Fremantle Prison Heritage Management Plan, prepared for theWestern Australian Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage February 2019.
Fremantle Prison, 2009, Building the Convict Establishment, viewed 16 September 2020,
https://fremantleprison.com.au/media/1148/fp-building-the-convict-establishment.pdf
Garrick, P and Jeffery, C, 1987, Fremantle Hospital: A Social History to 1987. The University of Western
Australian Press.
Heritage Council, 2019, Archaeological Management Strategies.
Heritage TODAY and Fremantle Prison Heritage Team, 2017, Fremantle Prison Collection Significance
Assessment.
Mein, E, 2012, Inmate Coping Strategies in Fremantle Prison, Western Australia, Honour's thesis,
University of Western Australia, Crawley.
Winter, S, Green, J, Benfield-Constable, K, Romano, B and Drummond-Wilson, M 2020, ‘Investigating
underfloor and between floor deposits in standing buildings in Colonial Australia’,
International Journal of Historical Archaeology.
Winter, S. and Romano, B, 2019, ‘Archaeology, heritage, and performance in the Perth popular musicscene’, Journal of Contemporary Archaeology 6: 323–347.

Legislation
HeritageAct
2018(Western
Australia),
viewed08
September
https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/law_a147195.html

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 27 |

2020,

Planning and Development Act 2005 (Western Australia), viewed 08 September 2020,
https://www.legislation.wa.gov.au/legislation/statutes.nsf/main_mrtitle_722_homepage.ht
ml
Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act (Commonwealth of Australia), viewed 08
September 2020, https://www.legislation.gov.au/Details/C2016C00777

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 28 |

APPENDICES

Appendix A – Project contacts
Appendix B – Acronyms and terminology
Appendix C – Pricing schedule

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 29 |

APPENDIX A – PROJECT CONTACTS
The contact details of the heritage project stakeholders are provided below. Terra Rosa thanks
everyone involved with the project and its organisation.

Terra Rosa Consulting
Address

96 Marine Terrace, Fremantle, WA 6160

Emailinfo@trco.com.au

Report author

Fabienne Jose

Editors

Jade O’Brien and Megan Tehnas

Executive sign-off

Scott Chisholm

Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage
Contact

Dan Holland

Address

140 William Street, Perth Western Australia 6000

Fremantle Prison
Contact

Courtenay Heldt

Address

1 The Terrace, Fremantle WA 6160

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 30 |

APPENDIX B – ACRONYMS AND TERMINOLOGY
The following terms and acronyms are used in this report. Definitions are provided below for reference
and follow the Burra Charter.
Term / abbreviation

Definition

Adaption

Hanging a place to suit the existing use or a proposed use

BMA

Building Management Authority

Compatible use

A use that respects the cultural significance of a place. Such a use
involves no, or minimal, impact on cultural significance.

Conservation

All the processes of looking after a place so to retain its cultural
significance.

Cultural significance

Aesthetic, historic, scientific, social, or spiritual value for past, present or
future generations.
Cultural significance is embodied in the place itself, its fabric, setting,use, associations, meanings, records, related places, and related objects.
Places may have a range of values for different individuals or groups.

DPLH

Department of Planning, Lands and Heritage

FabricAll the physical material of the place including elements, fixtures,contents, and objects.

MaintenanceThe continuous protective care of a place, and its setting. Maintenanceis to be distinguished from repair which involves restoration orreconstruction.

Place

A geographically defined area. It may include elements, objects, spaces,and views. Place may have tangible and intangible dimensions.

Preservation

Maintaining a place in its existing state and retarding deterioration.

Reconstruction

Any place which may meet the criteria of an Aboriginal site under s5 of
the Aboriginal Heritage Act 1972 (WA).

Related place

A place that contributes to the cultural significance of another place.

Restoration

Returning a place to a known earlier state by removing accretions or byreassembling existing elements without the introduction of newmaterial.

Setting

The immediate and extended environment of a place that is part of orcontributes to its cultural significance and distinctive character.

Use

The functions of a place, including the activities and traditional andcustomary practices that may occur at the place or are dependent on
the place.

Terra Rosa

Terra Rosa Consulting

The Act

Heritage Act 2018 (WA)

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 31 |

APPENDIX C – PRICING SCHEDULE
It is proposed that an archaeological test-pitting program could be conducted where the floors arebeing removed. For the test-pitting program it suggested that the room is gridded and test pit locations
are chosen from the grid in areas where it is more likely that artefact would be identified based on thework of Winter et al (2020).
This estimate is based on 2 heritage consultants undertaking the test pitting program in the following
locations (see figure 9 for locations):•

Two test pits each in G-03, G-04 and G-15;•

10 test pits in G-07; and•Four test pits in G-16.

It is estimated that the 20 test pits could be removed by shovels and sieved. The test pit locations would
either be in “sweep zones” or locations where large gaps are identified in the floorboards. It would bealso requested that one day of archaeological recording take place prior to the removal of thefloorboards.
Upon completion of this work, a preliminary advice would be provided including a second budget
estimate would be provided with the estimated time for post-excavation works including a report.
Any further works beyond this or any archaeological investigations would be agreed with Fremantle
prison prior to commencing. In the case of archaeological investigation, a senior archaeologist would
be made available to attend the Hospital. The hourly rates for this are provided below.

Hourly Rates
Position

Rate per hour(ex. GST)

Project Manager$160.00

Senior Archaeologist$140.00

Archaeologist$110.00

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 32 |

CONSULTANCY FEES AND EXPENSES
Pre-excavation investigation of floorboards

CONSULTANT TYPEPAXRATE PPDURATIONUNIT

AMT EXCL. GST

Excavation Program

Senior Heritage Consultant

1$1,120.00

1.00

days

$1,120.00

Excavation Program

Heritage Consultant

1$880.00

1.00

days

$880.00$2,000.00
Project Delivery

CONSULTANT TYPE

PAX

Fieldtrip Preparation

Heritage Consultant

1

Fieldtrip Preparation

Senior Heritage Consultant

Excavation Program
Excavation Program

RATE PPDURATIONUNIT

AMT EXCL. GST$110.00

5.00

hours

$550.00

1$140.00

5.00

hours

$700.00

Senior Heritage Consultant

1$1,120.00

3.00

days

$3,360.00

Heritage Consultant

1$880.00

3.00

days

$2,640.00$7,250.00
Reporting and Deliverables

CONSULTANT TYPEPAXRATE PPDURATION

UNIT

Preliminary Advice Report

Senior Heritage Consultant

1$1,400.00

1.00

days

AMT EXCL. GST$1,400.00$1,400.00
Project Expenses

DESCRIPTION

PAX

Miscellaneous

Excavation materials

1

RATE PP$750.00

DURATION

UNIT

1.00

lump sum

AMT EXCL. GST$750.00$750.00
PROJECT FEES AND EXPENSES TOTAL$11,400.00

GST$1,140.00

TOTAL BUDGET ESTIMATE$12,540.00

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 33 |

COPYRIGHTThis document is copyright. As such, no portion of this document may be reproduced or copied in any
form, or by any means, without prior written permission from the author except as permitted under
the Copyright Act 1968 (Cwlth). Notwithstanding this, Fremantle may use this material for the purposesof employee awareness and make enough copies for internal use.

DISCLAIMER
The information, opinion, ideas, and recommendations presented in this document is partly based on
the experience of the authors, research, and recognised procedures, which are believed to be accurate,
but not infallible. The advice contained herein is given in good faith and follows acceptable professional
standards and procedures, but is not meant to encourage any activity, practice or exercise, which may
have ceased, changed or have been superseded for any reason without the knowledge of the authors.
The authors assume no responsibility or liability for any loss or damage caused directly or indirectly by
the information presented in this document.

VERSION CONTROL
Version

Date

Change Log

Author(s)0.1

10/09/2020

Draft document created

F. Jose0.2

1/10/2020

Document edited

J. O’Brien

0.2

2/10/2020

Document issued

J. O’Brien

0.3

05/11/2020

Document edited

M. Tehnas

1.1

05/11/2020

Document sent for review

A. Golden

1.2

11/11/2020

Document edited

J. Harris and J.O’Brien

1.3

12/11/2020

Document issued

J.O’Brien

ARCHAEOLOGICAL MANAGEMENT STRATEGY – FREMANTLE PRISON THE HOSPITAL| 34 |