by Lucy Sullivan
In response to the interest of Jan Barkley Jack and Carol Carruthers, A I have for some time had it in mind to try to identify the site of Andrew Thompson's original bridge over South Creek. Jan and Carol thought the site might be located in a paddock I acquired when I bought my house in Pitt Street, Windsor, four years ago. The paddock, across the road from my house, abuts the north bank of South Creek, just downstream from Fitzroy Bridge. Thompson died in 1810, and his bridge was replaced a little upstream by another bridge. The site of Thompson's bridge is nevertheless marked on old maps (a pre-1845, one given to me by Jan and one produced by the surveyor when I bought my land), as "Old Bridge", and it is positioned, on my side of the creek, at a tongue of land projecting into the creek, and narrowing its breadth at that point by about one third, which would have reduced the difficulty of bridge construction there.
Consultation of the maps showed that the Old Bridge was, in fact, much closer to Fitzroy Bridge than my bit of creek bank. The next section of creek bank in the direction of the bridge is Crown land, and is shown on the old maps as a street named South Street, running at right angles across the south-western end of Pitt Street, to terminate as a dead end at South Creek. The high, steep bank of the creek in fact makes a road down at that point quite impracticable. But the maps suggest the old bridge was even further upstream than the boundary of the ghostly South Street, and possibly on Mal McEwan's property.
The creek in this area, upstream to beyond Fitzroy Bridge and downstream beyond my paddock, has two levels of bank on the north side - a low one, barely above high tide level and varying from perhaps four to eight metres in width, and a high steep bank, up to five or so metres above the high tide level, which contains the creek in times of moderate flood. The creek thus cuts a deep channel across the flood plain at this point. The present Fitzroy Bridge takes advantage of the high banks to avoid problems of access, but Andrew Thompson's semi-floating bridge was at the lower level and so would have required the provision of a graded road down the steep upper banks to water level.
The slopes of the high bank are almost invariably covered with a thick, matted wetland scrub, difficult to penetrate, much as described by Watkin Tench B in about 1790 as characteristic of the banks of watercourses in the area. The flat area at water level is much the same, but with occasional small open patches of a lush native grass near the water. A section of the bank in my paddock is unusual in that it provides easy access to the creek bank, with a broad, easy grade descending sideways down the bank in parallel with the creek, and the grass of the paddock above follows it down. One could get a tractor down without much difficulty.
The thick vegetation on the steep high bank, and also on the flat low bank with its pitfalls of hidden logs and sudden hollows, had proved a deterrent to any attempt to check out the position of the Old Bridge at creek level either from directly above or by proceeding along the low bank from my property. The flooding in January 2001 changed this. The force of the water swept away much of the loose vegetation on the low bank, making it easily accessible, so I thought I should make use of this window of opportunity to try to identify the site. I gingerly picked my way along the bank, amongst the flattened vegetation and debris, thinking that it was highly unlikely that that peculiar little tongue of land would have survived the numerous floods of close to two centuries. Near the high bank the ground was uniformly messy, but there were a number of little projections into the stream with bright green covers of thick soft grass which might have been the remains of the bridge promontory. Then, just in sight of Fitzroy Bridge round the curve of the creek, which is just where it should have been, was a projection much more significant than the rest, which seemed to be the contender of contenders.
A broken-off thick stump of a willow was at its downstream outer edge, but otherwise it was mainly grassy. It was at a slightly lower level than the rest of the bank, as if subsiding, and an obviously recent crack in the unusual glutinous soil of the lower bank was showing, just where it projected from the regular shoreline, as if it might be about to break away. This part of the bank had suffered exceptional damage in the relatively minor flood, as a result of the poisoning of the willows which had supported its banks, part of a recent "environmental" project. The dead trunks and their harvest of soil had been ripped out and dumped in the middle of the creek, where they remain a year later. No such damage occurred in the similar flood a year earlier, when the willows were still alive. It seemed a pity that that bit of ignorant intervention might remove a centuries old historical landmark.
I reported my find to the Jacks, and Ian C came and had a look and agreed that it did seem likely to be the bridge site. It was at this point that it dawned on me that the "vehicular" access to the lower bank in my paddock could well be the survival of the access constructed for Thompson's bridge - that it was not a natural formation, but a graded road cut into the bank to bring vehicles up and down from the bridge. After leaving the bridge, they would have run along the lower bank for some 100 metres downstream, then turned back to ascend the bank at a point where it is lower than at the bridge site itself. The old maps, in fact, appear to mark this exit as contour lines, the route then being across to the far side of my paddock, just below the second fence, and exiting to Pitt Street where the current gate is located, and where the natural grades (perhaps with a little help) are lowest. Ian and I agreed that the south bank opposite the tongue of land appeared to descend with an easier grade than elsewhere, perhaps constructed, but perhaps natural and contributing to the choice of site.
The next step seemed to be to examine the southern creek bank at close hand for possible clues, or at least to confirm the possibility of access, but time passed. Fortunately 2001 was a dry year, so the vegetation did not re-establish itself on the low bank as voluptuously as it might have, and in October when I was consulting with Land and Water Conservation officials about the harmful effects of the destruction of the willows, it was still reasonably accessible, and anyway I now knew what to expect underfoot. The growth, though high, was mainly of a sort one can tread down. It was on a reccy that I noticed, projecting just above the waterline, a thick log of about 18 inches diameter (45cm), similar to that used until recently for minor country road bridges. It was angled slightly downwards, projecting from the bank about two feet, with the smooth contours (though pitted with age) of a telegraph pole, and cut or broken off fairly evenly at the projecting end.
It looked to me as if it could well have been one of the timbers of the old bridge, and this, of course, was an unexpected and very exciting find. I don't know why I didn't see it the first time - perhaps the overhanging vegetation had been more obscuring. There was, of course, the possibility, at that distance, that it was simply a rather large fallen log embedded in the bank, and close investigation was needed. I took some photos, but without benefit of a telephoto lens.
What with Christmas and so on, there matters rested until I ran into Jan and Ian in the mall on the Australia Day D holiday, and they suggested a visit to inspect my find. As I had nothing particular to do that the afternoon, I was prompted to finally undertake my south bank inspection, which suggested itself as a pleasant enough activity close to home. It also offered an inspection of the forest Council has planted along the south bank and spreading across the flood plain towards the Windsor-McGrath's Hill section of Windsor Road. This had been concerning me, firstly, because it is destroying the historic character of the approach to Windsor and blocking the sight-line to Tebbutts, and secondly, because it is out of character with what early reports suggest was the environment of this area when Europeans arrived - namely, a fenland with few large trees and a low thick scrub along the creek and river banks only. Proponents of this revegetation promise a diminution of weeds as a result of forest establishment and this proved to be the case. The ground cover could not be more different on the north and south banks of South Creek at this point, and it is very easy and pleasant to walk unobstructed between the tree trunks which descend down the high bank almost to the water's edge; but this also means the soil is bare and exposed, and should the trees be washed away in a heavy flood, a likelihood for which there is evidence, they will take great chunks of earth with them and leave the bank entirely unprotected. There is certainly nothing of the thick, scrubby understorey described by Tench.
When I reached my log I was delighted to find that there were not one, but two, of uniform size, the second running parallel and about a yard upstream, both just above high tide level. There was a third projection about two yards downstream, covered with a thick mat of turf, which could well have been a third log, but I was unable to get close enough to the water level to look. I thought I would need to inspect it from the water, by canoe, but later found that it had appeared in my photos from the opposite bank at lower tide, and that a log did indeed appear to be supporting it. While one log might make a doubtful claim to be part of a bridge, two or three parallel make a far more convincing case. When viewed from close at hand it was clear that they were good, perhaps dressed, hardwood, brought from elsewhere, and certainly not simply bits of fallen willow trunk, or some other local soft timber.
As I had made my way along the slope of the bank (the flat shore at water level is absent on this side) looking for the log, there had been a couple of points at which a road might have come down, but the slope immediately above the timbers now seemed the most likely access, so I climbed up it and was excited to see, appearing over the top of the bank, what looked like an elaborate and ancient slab fencing structure which might have been a gateway to the bridge. When I reached it, however, I found it was simply a marked angle in a post and rail fence of considerable age, which I proceeded to uncover from a mat of leaf and grass litter for a few panels in the direction of Fitzroy Bridge, and then followed for some way in the opposite direction towards McGrath's Hill. This fence is remarkably intact, and fortunately has not been disturbed by the tree planters. All the uprights are in place, and vertical, although often truncated, and all the bottom rails are also present, although now resting at ground level. The line of fence extending towards McGrath's Hill is just sufficient distance from the lip of the high bank to suggest that the fence bordered a road running along the bank, leading to or perhaps past Thompson's bridge.
Examination of the Armstrong map (about 1840) showed this fence, with its sharp turn just above the old bridge, already in existence. The Jan Wyld map of 1817 shows a side road separating from the Windsor Road and running roughly parallel with it on its northern side, then turning sharply left at the bend in South Creek where the old bridge is, to rejoin it just before the current bridge, in roughly its present position; and what appears to be a still earlier map shows only this road in existence, but without the southward turn at the end, and terminating at South Creek, at a position about halfway down Pitt Street on the other side, in the region of the present day turf farms. This suggests that the final part of Windsor Road was moved progressively to the south as bridges further upstream over South Creek were established.
Hawkesbury Council's 1996 plan for the development of the flood plain adjoining Windsor Road as a recreational area, proposes a walking track along the south bank of South Creek, but makes no mention of the fence as an artefact of historic importance. It would add to the interest of the walk if sensitively maintained, but it could well be unthinkingly destroyed if plans go ahead without specific action being taken for its preservation. With the planting of a eucalypt forest across it, it is also now at risk of destruction by fire as never before. According to current plans, the Great River Walk along the Hawkesbury-Nepean may also pass ths way, making it a matter of urgency to raise Council awareness of the probable historical significance of this structure.
Any comments or information please contact the author Lucy Sullivan
References
1. Jan Barkley Jack is the Curator and Carol Curuthers is the Assistant Curator of the Hawkesbury Museum.
2. Watkin Trench 1788 edited by Tim Flannery published by Text Publishing - Melbourne
3. Professor Ian Jack
4. Australia Day is the 26th January and marks the day on which the First Fleet landed at Sydney Cove.
[ Back to previous ] [ Research by Members ] [ Back to Historical Society's Home Page ]