5.3 OBSERVATIONS ON THE WATERFRONT

[Table of Contents] [Previous Chapter] [Next Chapter] [Main Page]

[Next Section] [Previous Section] [Chapter Head]

Weaver, Robert M.. (1998) 5.3 Observations on the Waterfront. In Historical Development of the Chena River Waterfront, Fairbanks, Alaska: An Archaeological Perspective, edited and compiled by Peter M. Bowers and Brian L. Gannon, CD-ROM. Alaska Department of Transportation and Public Facilities, Fairbanks.

Archaeological data from the Barnette Project add information about day to day activities that were not unremarkable or considered "newsworthy" by the people of the time. The data offer clues about the past, providing building blocks for answering other questions about behavior, preference, and attitude of local residents, and help to document trends in urban development.

Analysis of the Barnette archaeological data illustrates some basic patterns and postulates trends for future study. Ideally, a blend of the historical and archaeological records can result in a gradual refinement of interpretations as more information comes to light. Therefore, the data analysis serves to raise questions as much as it strives to answer them. The interpretation can force re-examination of existing records, and result in a richer understanding of the history and culture of an area.

The following analysis examines two aspects of Fairbanks as gleaned from the Barnette Project information. The first analysis looks at differences in alcoholic beverage selection between the California and Miners’ Home saloons. The second provides observations on the changing attitudes of permanence as shown by the types of construction among three different structures.

The Saloons

Statistical analysis in Section 5.1 and Appendix 10 examined similarities and differences among stratigraphic levels and evaluated functional patterns of the different operational areas. This analysis did not exhaust the possible groupings and statistical interpretation of the data. It did, however, establish that no stereotypical "saloon" cluster patterns emerge from the California and the Miners’ Home saloons based on use of the functional typology.

If one imagines differences among today’s drinking establishments, one can project a potential for different patterns among early Fairbanks’ saloons. Bars and saloons cater to clientele with different preferences and social affinities. Today, such places often are labeled by stereotypical impressions of the types of people who frequent them (e.g., yuppie bars, biker bars, blue collar taverns, society lounges, and others). The historical record suggests similar subgroups clustered in the different Fairbanks saloons during the gold rush days. What differences occur in the archaeological record?

Section 5.1 and Appendix 10 examined a detailed artifact subset from the saloons, namely commercial service items (alcohol-related items, non-alcoholic beverages, and container openers and closures). The study compared the cellar assemblages from both saloons. The California Saloon showed a statistical mix of beverages with lower than expected hard liquor products and higher than expected non-alcoholic containers. The Miners’ Home assemblage, on the other had, emphasized a range of alcoholic beverages. The analysis also established a strong relationship between the river bank dump in Area A (Levels A4, A4a, and A4b) and activities in the California Saloon.

The following discussion uses an even more focused artifact subset than used in Appendix 10. It examines the preferences for certain alcoholic beverages at the California and Miners’ Home saloons based on artifact frequencies. The analysis compares artifacts from the Miners’ Home cellar with the relatively "pure" gold rush era Area A Early Saloon assemblage. The Area A assemblage was selected for comparison because it reflects discard of artifacts from a relatively discrete time period.

The cellar of the Miners’ Home appears to show similarities in terms of clientele-originated artifacts. The statistical analyses in Section 5.1 and Appendix 10 hint that people used the Miners’ Home cellar more frequently than one would expect for a storage cellar. The abundance of "clothing items" (Sprague Class 1A) in the Miners’ Home cellar, particularly the high number of buttons, fits a pattern expected if the cellar was actively used by patrons.

The building’s interior construction layout (as evidenced in the archaeological excavations) lends more credence to this idea. A stove once sat along the cellar’s east wall and a framework for benches was revealed along the adjacent south wall (Figures 4.64 and 4.65). The archaeological excavations determined that the entry descended from the west end of the cellar and historical photographs demonstrate that access was not from the exterior. Therefore, the stairway leading to the cellar was entered from a location at the interior front of the saloon and not far away from the building’s main public entryway. This layout at the Miners’ Home suggests two linked public activity spaces—the main floor and basement—rather than a public space above a functional storage area.

This analysis compares two saloons dating to the first decade of Fairbanks. Both were built within a couple of years of each other; both would have stopped serving alcohol with the advent of Prohibition. Therefore, the assemblages from each should represent contemporaneous activity. What can we see in the patterns of alcoholic beverage selections at each saloon and how might they reflect differences among local groups?

The Miners’ Home Saloon catered to members of the mining community, as inferred by its proximity to the mine trailhead, the name of the business, and to some extent historical records. Its location near the Tanana Valley Railroad terminus predisposed a relationship to travelers arriving by rail and trail from the mines. We do not have as good a correlation for patrons frequenting the California Saloon. Its proximity to the shipping docks and waterfront suggest that the clientele included mostly steamboat crews, waterfront dock workers, the clerks and warehousemen of the nearby NC Co., and travelers on the steamboats. Thus, the two patron populations differed: based on census data, the Miners’ Home population and associated ethnicities should have varied greatly and was transient, whereas the California Saloon would have drawn from the more locally stable population of waterfront workers.

What, then, do we observe in subsets of the artifact assemblages as applied to alcoholic beverage preference? Both the archaeology and the historical record indicate that three major categories of alcohol (wine, liquor, and beer) were served at each saloon. No regulations have been identified that would restrict sales of any one particular alcoholic commodity. Therefore, the nature of the assemblage should reflect the preference or tastes of the clientele.

A subset of artifact classes were examined that have a specific relationship to alcohol. The artifacts include the original product containers (bottles) and the service containers (various glasses). Included in the tabulation are beer (5J4a2b), wine (5J4a2a), and distilled liquor bottles (5J4a2c and 5J4a3) along with drinking glasses (2B2b1), stemware (5J4a1a), and shot glasses (5J4a1b). Table 5.18 shows a tabulation of each item for the Early California Saloon Area A main cluster opposed to the Miners’ Home Area G subset.

Table 5.18. Sprague Class Frequencies for Alcohol Containers.

* Area A cluster from Levels 4, 4a, and 4b.
** Area G cluster from Levels 3 and 4.

Table 5.19 examines the frequency of the different alcohol containers, without the glassware, for each saloon. The frequencies suggest a strong preference towards beer in the California Saloon assemblage. The Miners’ Home demonstrates a pattern favoring distilled alcohol and wine with a lower preference for beer.

Table 5.19. Beverage Containers from the California Saloon Dump and Miners’ Home Cellar.

As a check on the reasonableness of the relationship, we also looked at combining related artifacts: wine and stemmed glasses; beer and drinking glasses; distilled alcohol and shot glasses. The set includes the containers that the product came in and the containers used for service. The sets would tend to control for beer service from a tap rather than a bottle source. Keg taps from the archaeological record show that at least some of the beer service at each establishment came from kegs. If, for example, all beer at the Miners’ Home was served in a glass, we would expect a dramatic change in the frequency proportions by the addition of the drinking glass category. Yet, when the data are collapsed, the basic pattern does not change substantially, as shown in Table 5.20.

Table 5.20. Bottle and Drinking Glass Combined Frequencies.

Examining the Freeman-Tukey deviates (Appendix 10) for the combined container items emphasizes the differences between the two saloons as shown in Table 5.21.

Table 5.21. Freeman-Tukey deviates for the selected sample of alcoholic beverage items. Significant deviations indicated by bold, underlined text (G=50.981, df=2, p=0.000).

The table shows a consistent pattern of significant deviation from expected norms, which support the observations on preferences at each establishment. Beer was the beverage of choice at the California Saloon, while hard liquor and wine were preferred at the Miners’ Home.

Finally, when applied to just the wine and liquor beverage items alone, the Freeman-Tukey deviates show no difference (G=0.070, df=1, p=.0792). This implies that wine and hard liquor were nearly equal in terms of client preference.

The analysis shows evidence for two distinct groups of patrons with different alcoholic beverage tastes and preferences. Translating this initial observation into a more elaborate understanding of the differences between the groups will require an expanded analysis using both historical and archaeological records. For example, expanding on the alcohol data analysis would require an understanding of relative costs for the different types of beverages as well as estimating consumption quantity relationships. The hard liquor, wine, and imported beer that shows in the Miners’ Home assemblage may represent a larger outlay of per capita cash than reflected in the California Saloon beer relationships.

Questions guiding future research include the following: Does the Miners’ Home assemblage demonstrate a pattern more closely associated with the arrival in town of people splurging after days of hard work in the hills? (One thinks of the stereotype from the old west of trailhands lavishly spending their earnings at the end of the trail.) Does selection represent ethnic origins? What factors drove the economics and choices near the steamboat landings?

Construction Techniques and the Attitude of Permanence

Various attitudes, objectives, and perhaps even values of the early residents can also be reflected by the several structures encountered by the Barnette Project (as expressed in light of construction techniques). The California and Miners’ Home saloons and the river bank stabilization underpinnings of the NC Co. Dock have unique construction aspects, and each provide some insights about attitude and expectation of the designers and builders.

For the California Saloon, construction techniques and materials demonstrate the builders’ awareness of soil dynamics, yet also imply that haste and cheapness were important considerations. The design used a tiered approach to constructing a cellar. The main cellar floor did not extend to the outer perimeter of the building. Rather, the excavated hole stepped down in two levels. This minimized the external earth-loading pressures on the flimsy construction of the outer wall. In fact, the foundation, such as it existed, appears to have relied on a pier and post structural system rather than a continuous foundation and footing. A nominal footing resulted from placing a series of horizontal planks around the exterior. The planks, however, served more to anchor a short stub retaining wall than to act as a load distribution system. Loads for the two-story superstructure were carried on a series of spaced concrete blocks that rested on the planks (Figures 4.22, 4.23, and 4.25). Therefore, the outer cellar wall required only nominal strength, and was built using a 2x4 frame and board sheathing system. The design became even more limited where loads were less. Where the building footprint extended beyond the basic cellar, underneath the bowling alley extension, the construction changed to vertical planks between a pair of 2x4 stringers.

The whole subgrade structure as described above was quick to build and spare of materials—basic cheap construction. The historical photographs show more attention to aesthetic image on the visible part of the building, but all we can really see are exterior features, not structure. The California Saloon fits a construction pattern seen elsewhere in gold rush communities. Permanence apparently did not rate high in the value systems of some builders, designers, or owners. The design shows a desire to open an establishment as quickly as possible in order to maximize opportunity and revenue. Whether by choice or necessity, when Alfred White contracted for construction of the California Saloon, he did not see a need for a strong and permanent edifice bearing his name.

The crib structure under the NC Co. Dock forms a distinct contrast to the California Saloon. Here we see the work of craftsmen concerned with permanence. Care was taken in forming the saddle notches so the logs meshed together tightly (Figure 4.54). The logs themselves came from substantial local trees and were prime quality. Careful thought and planning went into developing the load-bearing capacities and the use of materials fit the circumstances and objectives. For example, the leading wall formed a monolithic barrier against the forces of the river; the innermost wall of the crib, however, needed to anchor the structure but did not require such solid knitting as the front. Rather than stack logs one-on-one, the builders chose to skip a tier (possibly an engineered conservation of scarce materials). Only one cross-log tied together two of the logs that formed the walls perpendicular to the river.

At least two desires on the part of the builders likely drove the design of this simple but elegant structure. One objective obviously dealt with the value of permanence. The town had tried unsuccessfully between 1904 and 1907 to abate the forces of the river. Each time, the solution did not hold up to the force of the river and major damage occurred to the waterfront banks. After trying numerous but relatively simple fixes, the citizens decided to lavish some care and expense on the problem.

The second desire relates directly to the organization responsible for construction in this portion of the river. The NC Co. chose to supervise and construct the bulkheads from at least the east end of their dock downstream to the Pioneer Dock. The company had the financial resources and a permanent commitment to the town. They certainly wanted to maintain their stature as the main commercial outlet, and hoped to do so for many years. Therefore, a permanent, well-built structure also projected the image of permanence and the aspirations of the company itself.

The Miners’ Home construction falls somewhere in between the previous two examples in terms of attitude towards craftsmanship, image, and permanence. The design differs in its use of log construction rather than the frame building technique. By the time it was built in 1907, the sawmills in town provided adequate lumber to build most buildings. The Miners’ Home construction, however, relied mainly on logs and mill slabs. The cellar, as revealed by archaeology, shows little understanding of loading pressures, particularly of the heavy mass imposed by the superstructure of stacked logs. Our best calculations suggest that, at least on the north and west side, the cellar extended almost to the base row of logs that supported the building. By design or the happenstance of material selection, the cellar’s interior retaining wall had more strength than the flimsy California Saloon. Vertical post logs and half-logs had outer sheathing of quarter rounds. The latter likely came as cheaper remnants of lumber mill operations. In one sense, the Miners’ Home also reflects a low budget value in its construction. The exterior photographs also show a lack of craftsmanship in log joining techniques. Nevertheless, the choices by the developer resulted in a substantial structure with some hope for permanence, if maintained. Unfortunately, later modifications to the building, which added a row of windows along the facade, so compromised the original structure that it did not survive. The building was listed as dilapidated and not worth saving when the arrival of the railroad forced abandonment of the Riverside Block in 1923.

Conclusions

This section has demonstrated that different, yet identifiable, drinking patterns existed at the California and Miners’ Home saloons as represented in the Barnette Project data. The analysis suggests that the differences reflect the types of people frequenting each establishment, and further postulates differences in attitude, economics, and possibly ethnicity between the two contemporaneous groups. Future work by historians and archaeologists should explore further the cause of the dynamics suggested by the data. In addition, this section explored attitudes (as evidenced in buildings) that reflect changing perceptions of the town itself. The California Saloon, built in 1904, show the expedience and impermanence of other boom-town construction. By 1907, however, the town was in transition. The NC Co. and the waterfront reconstruction suggest a change in the residents’ mindset to believing in a permanence and future as a regional center. The Miners’ Home also suggests at least the builders’ desire for longevity of construction. The analysis of these changing perceptions of the town, whether through structures or other data, could further clarify important shifts in the development from frontier to urban center.

[Next Section] [Previous Section] [Chapter Head]

[Table of Contents] [Previous Chapter] [Next Chapter] [Main Page] [Top of Page]