Artefacts of South AustralianArtefacts of South Australian 

Although relatively scant, diagnostic artefacts found on South Australian all point to a period of manufacture and use during the early 19th century and are largely British in origin. Decorated ceramics within the assemblage reached peak use during the 1820s and 1830s, which correlates exactly to the span of South Australian’s sailing career (and that of its prior identities as Marquess of Salisbury and HMP Swallow). Even undecorated stoneware artefacts exhibit diagnostic traits indicative of early 19th-century origins, and a Selters jug located in the bow hints at an association with the small contingent of Germans who embarked aboard South Australian at Plymouth in December 1836. Intact bottles and bottle glass found in the bow section also point to British manufacture ca. 1820–1830. Some of the more notable artefacts in the assemblage are discussed below.

A whetstone was found in two pieces in the forwardmost part of South Australian’s bow section when the site was discovered in 2018 and was later recovered in November 2022. It is clearly broken, but how exactly that occurred is unclear. It may have fragmented during South Australian’s wrecking event, but could also have been damaged prior to, or after, the vessel’s loss. Whetstones were used to sharpen a variety of edged implements, ranging from knives to harpoons. Because South Australian was being used as a whaling vessel at the time of its loss, the presence of a whetstone is not surprising, as one would have been necessary to keep harpoons, flensing knives and other whaling implements razor sharp and ready for use. However, the whetstone could also have been cargo intended for the new colony in South Australia, broken in transit, and instead used as ballast. South Australian’s first logbook notes four ‘grindstones’ were loaded as cargo in Plymouth, so the whetstone could be one of them.

An array of fasteners were observed on South Australian, many of which were lying loose among the surviving hull. These included large copper bolts used to hold critical architecture—such as the keelson, floors and keel—together. Smaller fasteners were also noted, including spikes, nails, and sheathing tacks. One copper spike recovered from the bow section featured a small ‘Broad Arrow’ stamped on its shank—a mark denoting British government ownership and the only artefact so far discovered that reveals the barque’s service as a packet in the Royal Navy.

A rectangular lead sheet known as a ‘tingle’ was recovered from the site in November 2022. Tingles often came in the form of strips or patches and were used primarily for shipboard maintenance and repair. They were also frequently used in conjunction with fabric (such as sail canvas) or oakum (loose rope fibres or fragments) to plug leaks: the fabric would be placed atop and into a leak and the tingle installed over it and bent into shape to form a watertight seal. Small tacks were then hammered into the periphery of the tingle to affix it to a timber and hold it in place

Six large trapezoidal stone gunflints were recovered from South Australian’s stern-midships section between 2018 and 2022. All are larger than standard flintlock gunflints of the period and may have been used in conjunction with a firearm with a larger-than-average flintlock mechanism, such as a wall gun or harpoon gun. Alternatively, they may have been used or intended for use with heavy ordnance, such as the carronades South Australian mounted during its tenure as the naval packet Swallow. Another option is that they were used as strike-a-lights/fire starters. It is not possible at this stage to state with any degree of certainty whether South Australian’s gunflints were used for small arms or artillery or, because they were found within the lower hold, were intended for shipboard use, part of the vessel’s cargo, or supplies for shore-based whaling.

Five fragments of decorated ceramic were observed on South Australian, four of which were left in situ, and the other recovered in June 2019 for analysis. All were located at the interface between the wreck site’s midships and stern sections. One in situ fragment was an example of hand-painted blue-and-white pearlware that may have originated from a teacup or small lid (e.g., for a sugar bowl or teapot). Two other fragments left in situ appear to be examples of either “Seaweed” or “Fibre” pattern transfer-printed ceramics that originated from a bowl, cup, or similar form of tableware. The recovered ceramic fragment is somewhat larger and appears to have originated from the body of a wide, straight-sided vessel, such as a washbasin or chamber pot. It, and another plate rim fragment left in situ, are decorated with a transfer-printed “Blue Willow” pattern.

Transfer-printed Blue Willow pattern ceramics were first introduced around 1790 and are characterized by a riverine landscape that depicts a bridge and large pagoda in the foreground, several small pagodas or houses on islands in the background, willow trees, and one or more boats on the water. The original “standard” version of Blue Willow—which is usually printed in a lighter shade of blue and features design motifs identical to those on the sherd recovered from South Australian—reached peak production between 1825 and 1840. Hand-painted blue-and-white pearlware was manufactured by numerous English potteries between 1775 and 1840. After 1820, pearlware was embellished with bold, hand-painted blue floral designs that enjoyed a period of popularity over other contemporary Chinoiserie-decorated ceramics. Transfer-printed wares featuring both the Seaweed and Fibre patterns emerged during the 1820s and 1830s and were immensely popular in Great Britain and its colonies during that period. Ceramic artefacts with both designs have been recovered from early to mid-19th-century colonial sites throughout Australia and New Zealand.

A complete dark olive-green bottle recovered from South Australian in 2019 has a long, relatively narrow cylindrical body. In terms of overall form, it most closely approximates British “wine-style quart” bottles manufactured with the dip-mould technique between ca. 1790 and 1820. The bottle’s neck is approximately one-third the length of the body and bulges at its approximate halfway point before tapering and ending in an applied “down-tooled” lip and flattened string rim. The base features a steep conical push-up that terminates in a pronounced pontil scar. No mould seams are evident on the bottle, and the base features a “rounded heel” characteristic of wine and beer bottles dating to the first quarter of the 19th century.

The other intact bottle recovered from South Australian is manufactured from light aqua-green glass, and approximately half the size of the dark green example but otherwise shares many diagnostic attributes. The bottle’s body is relatively long and narrow and features a base with a slightly bulged heel and steep, conical push-up. A pontil scar is not evident, suggesting the bottle was manufactured with the use of a “sand pontil,” a method specific to English bottle makers that was gradually replaced by the “snap” technique from the late 1830s onwards. Both the rim and lip are down-tooled, although the latter appears somewhat flatter in profile. No mould seams are evident, suggesting the bottle was likely produced in a dip mould. 

It is presently unclear what the bottle originally contained at the time of South Australian’s loss. Early 19th-century aqua and aqua-green glass bottles came in a variety of forms, including those used to store and transport medicine, bitters, soda/mineral water, and ink, as well as fruit jars and condiment containers. Although less common, aqua and aqua-green glass was also used in the production of alcoholic beverage bottles, specifically those used for beer, ale, and ginger beer.