Reading shell middens: investigating Australian coastal diets during c. 500–1500 CE

Investigate what shell middens can reveal about gathering, preparing and eating food. Separate observations from interpretations, check whether evidence belongs to the period under study, and explain what remains uncertain.

Using this worksheet

Work from the two source summaries below. They are paraphrases of published information, not excavation records or eyewitness accounts. No invented finds or quantities are supplied. The questions are open-ended and require evidence-based explanations.

The inquiry concerns c. 500–1500 CE. “Medieval” is the website’s chronological category, not a claim that Aboriginal Australian societies followed European historical periods. Evidence from one locality cannot establish a single diet for all Australian coastal communities.

Optional regional reading: Shell middens and coastal food gathering around Moreton Bay.

Reading shell middens: evidence and investigation

Name: ____________________ Class: ____________________ Date: ____________________

Inquiry: What can we responsibly say about coastal food gathering during c. 500–1500 CE? An observation records material or a reported finding; an inference explains what it might mean. Identify the source, place and dating limits before making a claim.

Source A — Recognising evidence of everyday activities

Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania describes middens as deposits containing discarded shell and sometimes bone, plant remains, ash and charcoal. Such deposits provide evidence of hunting, gathering and food processing. Material may come from one meal or repeated visits over a long period. Natural processes can also concentrate shells, so shell alone does not settle how a deposit formed. This guidance concerns Tasmania generally; it does not date a particular midden to c. 500–1500 CE.

Source: Aboriginal Heritage Tasmania, Aboriginal Shell Middens

Source B — Checking the date and local environment

In a 2019 study, Tam Smith and Ian J. McNiven revisited excavated material from Sites 62 and 75b at Tin Can Inlet, southeast Queensland, immediately south of K’gari. They report upper midden deposits dating to the past 400 years. They suggest that the basal levels are probably less than approximately 1,000–1,500 years old, using evidence about landform development. Their interpretation connects differences in shell assemblages with shellfish habitats and changing sediments. These statements do not establish an exact calendar date for every find or demonstrate occupation throughout c. 500–1500 CE.

Source: Smith and McNiven (2019), Tin Can Inlet midden study, abstract

1. Connect material evidence with daily life

Choose two kinds of material mentioned in Source A. For each, identify a possible everyday activity it could help investigate and one question the material alone cannot answer. Do not assume these materials occurred together in a particular dated excavation.

Material 1 / possible activity / unanswered question: __________________________________________________

Material 2 / possible activity / unanswered question: __________________________________________________

2. Test whether the evidence fits the inquiry period

In Source B, distinguish the upper deposits from the basal levels. Which evidence is clearly later than the inquiry period? Which dating statement remains approximate? Explain why an estimated age for a basal level does not date every shell above it. Preserve the source’s uncertainty rather than inventing exact CE dates.

Later evidence: _________________________________________________________________________________

Approximate evidence and its limits: _________________________________________________________________

Further dating information needed: __________________________________________________________________

3. Challenge an unsupported claim

Claim for criticism, not a historical fact: “Shell middens prove that everyone on the Australian coast ate mainly shellfish throughout 500–1500 CE.” Identify three problems with this claim. Consider the geographical coverage, dating and whether discarded remains establish the proportions of a complete diet.

Problem 1: ______________________________________________________________________________________

Problem 2: ______________________________________________________________________________________

Problem 3: ______________________________________________________________________________________

4. Explain change without assuming its cause

Using Source B, explain how changing local habitats might affect the shellfish available to gather. What additional evidence would help distinguish a change in availability from a change in people's food choices? Label your proposed explanation as an inference.

Inference: _______________________________________________________________________________________

Evidence needed to test it: _________________________________________________________________________

5. Write a cautious conclusion

Write three or four sentences explaining what these sources help us investigate about everyday food gathering. Name a place and a source, distinguish evidence from inference, and state what cannot yet be concluded about c. 500–1500 CE. It is acceptable to conclude that the supplied evidence is insufficient for a particular claim.

________________________________________________________________________________________________

Self-check: Have I named the place, checked the dating, cited a source and stated a limitation? This is a document-based exercise; it requires no collecting or disturbance of midden material.