trade networks and interaction spheres--a view from silcottusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/histarch/week...

WILLIAM H. ADAMS

Trade Networks and Interaction Spheres-A View from Silcott

ABSTRACT

The people of Silcott, a small farming community in southeastern Washington, participated in six major trade networks: local, local-commercial, area-commercial, regional, national, and international. These networks are examined through the ethnographic, historical, and archaeological data. Remarkably, the regional, national and international networks are best studied through the archaeology, whereas the local networks and the area commercial networks are best examined through the ethnography. These networks bound Silcott into an integrated community. while at the same time they linked Silcott to the national economy via the various networks.

From family to community, from community to nation, people are entwined in economic networks eventually linking the individual consumer to the products of the nation. This paper explores the various networks linking Silcott, Washington to the areal, regional, and national economic networks, and examines the various internal networks with Silcott itself.

The network consists of a hierarchy of central places towards which people are oriented for social, economic, and political reasons. The “main street” of Silcott was the central place there. The nearby towns of Lewiston and Clarkston were the central places towards which many other small communities like Silcott were oriented. Lewiston and Clarkston were in turn one of many towns oriented to Spokane. Spokane’s interests were directed toward Portland and Seattle. This hierarchy linked the main street of Silcott to the main street of Portland through the networks of other main streets.

The interaction sphere is similar to the network except that the individual linkages are in themselves not as important as the fact

strated here that Silcott, as part of a national interaction sphere, was linked to such places as Hershey, Pennsylvania even though the individual strands within the network are not known. What is important is that Hershey and Silcott interacted, albeit indirectly. Silcott people bought Hershey’s Cocoa, thus stimulating Hershey to produce more cocoa in order to provide Silcott with more cups of hot choco- late, and so on. Though this may seem trivial, it is not. This was just one link which Silcott shared with other communities; there were many others. When all these links are considered we see the tremendous quantity of shared links which provided the economic and social fabric of the nation. By studying one group of consumers, those in Silcott, we see how successful the nation was.

Silcott is a small farming community in southeastern Washington (Figure 1). Located on the narrow floodplain of the Snake River and in the steep tributary canyons, the patchwork of farms emphasized irrigated orchards and gardens in the valleys, wheat and grazing on the hillsides. The settlement began in the early 1860’s and continues to the present. The ethnographic and archaeological study of the community concentrated on the 1900 to 1930 period. That research has been dealt with elsewhere (Adams 1973, 1975, 1976; Adams, Gaw, and Leonhardy 1975; Gaw 1975; Leonhardy and Day-Ames 1975; Day- Ames n.d.; Riordan 1976, n.d.).

of their existence. Thus, it will be demon- FIGURE 1 . Location of Silcott, Washington.

100

The manufacturers of an artifact found in Silcott were identified wherever possible. The manufacturers (and their products) are presented in Table 1, along with their distance from Silcott, their location, and the frequency with which their products were found in Silcott. We wrote to extant companies, seeking information on the product and its history. The replies varied, but most were useful for identi- fying, dating, and locating the origin of the product. Many products were embossed or imprinted with both the name of the manufacturer and its location, thus simplifying

some of our work. The locations of these companies are shown in Figure 2. Two factors skew the sample. First are the large but unknown numbers of home-made artifacts, either unrecognized or not present in the archzological inventory, but indicated by the ethnography. Second, those artifacts which show the brand name (and hence can be identified) are often intended for the national market. Local brands are only rarely marked. These problems will require consideration in the interpretation of these data.

FIGURE 2. Locations and numbers of companies for products found in Silcott

The linear miles from Silcott to the place of manufacture were plotted. These relative distance figures approximate the real distance the artifact travelled, though in all cases distance would have been more than the figure given because of dog-legs in the routing. It is axiomatic that the shortest route is generally the most economic one. For comparative purposes here it is assumed the items travelled directly to Silcott in a straight line. For foreign

artifacts one exception to this is made: it is assumed the European products entered the United States via New York City, while the Asian products entered via Portland or Seattle. Linear measurement was made in a dog-leg fashion from the foreign port to the entry port to Silcott. The American companies and products were placed into five distance groups according to the kind of product (Tables 2, 3 ) .

TRADE NETWORKS AND INTERACTION SPHERES-A VIEW FROM SILCOTT 101

TABLE 1 LOCATION OF MANUFACTURERS

OlStance Location source Manufacturer source P l r o d U C t category

R71 821

E41A "01c y051

270 Renton W R 270 S e a t t l e w*

1 1 1 1 1

1 7 1

22

r41u 0130 0131 116Y n03x

C O I d20r E04 E33W E 3 3 Y e41m 1140

N138 D07D A601 D2UR A491 1.52 E?]", Y E335 A080 E4lL R6bC 11760 a46H 0 1 4 02% 117w

280 Portland 3 R 4 . H r ann1nq Jar

" 4, I- E, G

&

01,ve olll Uelro-Kola, Purola Beer Beer . Liquor E x p r t Beer Coffee

Whiskey H.H.H. 80158 Medicine ilrclr1e , m a mrve 311 .mra MJstard Jar Mustard Jar Beer M f t l f Beer M t t l E

)?'

Ketchup Bottle Medicine Bottle Whiskey Beer

P ~ c k l e s " Extract slllce 3ranqe Extrait Rivet : m ' T Rust $ e m

1 1 1

1 2 4 1 1 4 2 4

6 0 3 Sacramento C i i 640 Stockton cI\ 680 bar Franciiin CA

F H

/ I

I, H

H 1 1 6 / /

H

7. i E E

I

1 I

4 22

E33N h66E F41E r60 0 2 5 1161, M D 3 0 R N07G N O l V

0 0 2

U56

c01

5

5

8 5

1 5 1

E411 E15 &?OR 6 0 5 C

13

15

008 E09 6038 DO6 051 D l l A d02r 823A

1 D07P d13t A66K E4IF. G R 7 0 A . E'. Y E l m . E E413 175

I 5 2

151') s t rearor 11

24

E 3 3 E14 c09

American B o t t l e carpany H schram ~ u t o m a t l c sealer compin.; I, ' idolphus 3usck :lass M f q . :owany

Pepsoden t Compani P d e l b e r t M. ? o s f e r and omrany

A A r m u r ' s brnwur's

n Sa".ford Sanforc 4artford

A Beer Bottle A . H C a n r i n g Jar

4 eeer m t t i e A Toothpaste

Medlclnr Bottle R Top hotc', Brand

C"ld cream \, B Llbrary Paste

B '7) A Ink 2 Ink B Mustard 6 Pickles

Medic ine

69 8

1 7 5 2

38

1 5 2 0 H i l l s b o r a I: 1530 Bellevillr TL 1540 Ch i saqo TL

A73 1166H B l l " 8 2 1 105 G02D a18 7

4 5

A 5 9 D42

3 10 34 1

A26A R 5 0 B D I 802 BO3 d091

E E

E E

4 * 8 . C

A

Velvet Tobacco Dr. Price's Baking Powder

seer Bottle Beer B o t t l e Yedicine Bottlea Wine of Beef and Irona n r n t m e n t saw s?.rpe"er x(lnera1 water O v e l m C r e a m '0-qh Cyrup

Laxatlre lhiiksy

102E 0075 11611 1188

A70N a 6 6 F R701 E 3 1 5 E06 ,,

, H R 8 E06 NllB 101a R72 1191 D07P

OD'lR E24F

A . F

R h

D i s t a n c e Loca t lo" source

1700 1750

1750 1790 182s 1850 1850

1850 1900

1900

1940

1925

1960

2120 2200

1940 1950 2010

2040 2090 2150 2160 2220 2250 2250

2250

F l l n f HN Detroit HN

Toledo OH Kings M i l l OH CDhUMUS OH Newark mi Cleveland OH

Ashland OH E a s t L I V ~ T D O O ~ OH

New Orleans LA

Whee1mg w

Beaver Fa115 PA

P i t t s b u r g h PP

Hershey FA P h i l a d e l p h i a Pa

W e S t f l e l d NY B u f f a l o NY R o c h e s t e r NY

Corning NY Blnghanpton NY U t l c a NY Illon Gorge NY Hudmn NY Brook lyn NY New York NY

New 'forkb NY

2210 Salem NJ 2230 Newark NJ 2230 Bloomf ie ld NJ

2330 Providence RI

1060 WmsLon-Salem NC

2150 B a l t r m r e MD

2200 RiChmnd VI\

2280 New Haven CN 2290 GlaStOnbUrg CN 2290 Waterbury CN 2290 B r i d g e p o r t CN

2330 Lowel l HA

2350 Canbr ldge MA 2350 Boston MA

5500 Japan

6050 Tunsfall ENG

Hanley ENG Burslen ENG Tunstall ENG Fen ton ENG Hanley ENG

BurSlem ENG

T u n S t a l l ENG St. Helenr ENG S h e f f l e l d ENG H l d d l e s e x ENG

6650 Brenen GER ??? GER Bavaria GER

7050 Silesia POL

c R

A

B H * A li *

A

H

H B C A

c C H I\

R * E E E E c A * F ii A R A h A

H A C

E

I

A

R E

A R C A * A 1 R

A I\

R

R

A A R A A ii R H A H

A . H A R A

I

Ma"YfaCf"reI

AC Spark Plug Company F inck Ford Motor Company Prni-cular Chemical Compan)

HLE Co. Peters C a r t r i d g e Co. Dr. SBH & Company Amerlcan Bottle Company

. . . NFG CO. Dlll Valve s t e m F . E . nyers & 8110.

T a y l o r , S m l t h , and Taylor Honer Lauqh l in Marker Pottery Company Knaules. T a y l o r and X n w l e s

L.E. Junq

MuSteTOle company

F I ~ C C W Bras

J6E Mdyer P o t t e r y Company J6E m y e r p o t t e r y company R L D H Chambers DT. J. H o l t e t t e l Hershey C h o c o l a t e Company Henry K. Warnpole and Company

Welch Grape J U l C e Company Mentholatum Company F . E . Reed Glass Company ??? Corninq Glass Works D r . Kilmr and Campapy savage RImS company Remngron * Ins company The BayeI Company 6 c h r a d c r V a l v e Company Best Foods Un i t ed S t a t e Tobacco Company 3-in-One 011 Company The Centaur Company P h i l l i p s H l l k o f Maqnesia Chesebrauqh Hfg. Co. E . R . Durke and Company N a t l o n a l Remedy Company ~arrerr and Company . . .t and Co. . . .gists Colgare Colgate E . Weck auto S t i o p S a f e t y Razor Company

Gaynor Glass Works Gerha rd Hennen Chemical Company Charm ' s Candy Company

Rumfard Chermcal Works

R.J. Reynolds Company

Emerson Drug Company

.us and B r o . Company

Winches t e r Repeating A r m Company The TE V l l l l a m Company I n t e r n a t r o n a l SllYer conpany union ~erallic C a r t r i d g e Co.qany

United States C a r t r r d g e Company C.1. Hood and Company i iye r company Carter's Ink Company H l r m n y nhltrenare Hood Rubber Co. George Frost Company U . S . Fastener Company

??? 71'

A l f r e d Meakin

Johnson B r o t h e r s John Haddock 6 Sons Yedqwood and Company John Edwards and Company J. b G. Meakin C h a r l e s Heakln Charles l e a k i n Edward C l a r k e Edward C l a r k e N u t f a l l b Co. B a l l Brothers ~ a v e y 6 Moore, LTO

H e m n n Heye G l a s f a b r i k O r l a I ? ) ??? ???

i??

5ource

A , C R ii

I

R R

n. c

rz A .a R A

A

H

R A R 1

A . C

9 I

A . H

A. c R P R a

A. n

A A , E

D , E li. c

R A n R R I R n n

n n A

R

R

R

A A E A

* A . G

A , C

A . C

F

R

R E A

A A A I R I li A R

A . H A

A . H

A. H r?

Produc t Number

Spark P l u g Overall V i b r a t o r ~ o i n t P e n s l a r

Panatells cigar l m u n l t r a n Peruna Medlcrne B o t t l e a Musterole ,,? Valve stem Lever Ceramic Cer*ml ' P l a t e . ceramc a w l . saucer

COlUmba Peptic Bitters

Steer's Head Canning Jar

cocoa L i q i i d Wheat

Grape I l l ce Wentholarum Medicine Bottle Whiskey Pyrex B O W 1

S W a m i i - R o o t *""nitlo" R m u n r t l o n A5"lrl" Tire Valve

Copenhaqen 0 1 1 r l e r c ? e r ' s castorra Medlc ine "aSell"e Salad m e s s i n g En-Ar-Co 0 1 1 " l r q l n l a Dare Medlclne Toothpowder 0 1 n t m e n t S t l f f e n l n g c l amp " a l a Razor

Canning Jars Bora ted Talcum Charm Candy

Bakrnq Powder?

Prince Rlbert

BrORa-Seltler

Edgeworth

nayonna l se?

2 3 1 2

1 9 32 56 2 1 1 1 1 7 2 2

3

1

4 2 1

56 2 1

80 9 1 I I 9 1 1 2 4 1 1 4 1 1

11 4 1

2 3 1 I 1 2 2

2 1 1

1

86

4

3

58 1 3

3 5

4 IO 1 1 1 3 3 2 1

1 2

6

2 1 1 I I 2 1 1 1 2 1 1

1 1 I 2

1

c a t e g o r y

NlBD N18Q N03F NIB* d03

i16k N15 N16 Nli 132 E03 6038 Nl2I N14Q n181 n18n SOOG 5OOC 500s S O C J 5271 5030 5348

EliR

C 3 3

A 0 2 6031 013G E438 H07R 053 N 1 7 0 N156 I l 8 Q N12C W l R B Nl8H 117he 1165 R25 1 5 5 D07Q GOhA a12 NllO h30 d070 A35 0308

1171 NllC N148 L04B LOlP

0071

620

102F

g01

1026

N15 N16 N l l N22E M02 N15 N16 N i 7

Nlb N17 052C D52H 1268 R41R 045 Y O 9 A Y09E N04L NOlR N"7H

POlA p0411

SOOE som, n S 1 7 A S 1 9 R S 7 i . a SOSF SOIA

517d S09A S O I A 55411

5861 GlOC

a666

G l O A p031

POOR PO51 P39A

p1711

s i m

Lioa


NOTE: The following indicate the sources of identification of location and manufacturer

embossed/ imprinted/raised letters indicating place, company paper label data from company Periodical Publishers' Association of America (1 934) Brand Names Foundation (1 947) White (1974) Newspapers, city directories Toulouse (1 971 ) Colcleaser (1 967)

a

bProduct marked New York; ambiguous as to city or state.

Listed twice: by bottle maker and by bottle filler.

TABLE 2 NUMBER OF AMERICAN COMPANIES BY DISTANCE

Company 500- 1000- 1500- 2000- Total 0-500 1000 1500 2000 2500

. . . . . . . . . 4 3 0 5 7 19 Condiment Liquor . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 2 0 5 1 13 Medicine . . . . . . . . . . . 2 1 3 15 14 35 Other. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 2 1 17 18 42

a

TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . 15 8 4 42 40 109 PERCENTAGE . . . . 13.76 7.34 3.67 38.53 36.70 100.00

a Includes extracts, spices, baking powder, etc.

TABLE 3 NUMBERS OF ARTIFACTS BY DISTANCE

500- 1000- 1500- 2000- Total 0-500 1000 1500 2000 2500 Artifact

a Condiment . . . . . . . .

Medicine . . . . . . . . . . Other. . . . . . . . . . . . .

Liquor . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 41 0 171 32 25 1 7 12 0 129 1 149

. 24 8 23 142 46 243

. 21 8 85 68 218 400

TOTAL . . . . . . . . . . 59 69 108 5 10 297 1043

PERCENTAGE . . . . 5.66 6.62 10.35 48.90 28.47 100.00 a Includes extracts, spices, baking powder, etc.

104

Silcott participated in six different trade networks or interaction spheres. Some of these can be documented archaeologically, for example the regional and national networks, whereas the others can be approached only through ethnography. These six trade networks were: (1) local; (2) local-commercial; (3) area-commercial; (4) regional; (5) national; and (6) intemational.

The local network of Silcott was a barter system called “neighboring”. It is familiar to anthropologists as the dyadic and polyadic contract. Neighboring was a social contract between two individuals or two families in which tasks too large for individuals were tackled collectively. Neighboring was a phe- nomenon of frontier America and of a generally cashless economy. By sharing work as harvest, barn building, and slaughtering, a greater mutual wealth could be achieved. The economic function of such ties created social relationships. These invariably led to greater social cohesiveness. Distribution of social and economic ties was usually hori- zontal and single-stranded, that is, relationships developed among peers and the activi- ties were generally task specific. Neighboring can be many-stranded, a complex relationship based along several different lines. For example, two families help each other at harvest, at slaughtering, and at general get- togethers.

Horace Miner made a study of a farming community in Iowa where he found that “a farmer may ‘neighbor’ with some family a mile down the road and ignore the farmer next to him . . . simply because he follows the dictates of personal preferences and con- geniality’’ (Miner 1949:37). This held true in Silcott as well (Day-Ames 1975). One might neighbor with a half-dozen families at various times during the year, each of whom in turn neighbored with a slightly different set of families. The multitude of single-stranded and many-stranded relationships wove a network of social alliances binding Silcott into a single integrated community. On the geo- graphcal fringes of Silcott relationships were

woven with families whose social and economic ties were primarily oriented elsewhere. In the upper reaches of Alpowa Creek, along Knotgrass Ridge, people who were oriented towards either Peola or Silcott usually neighbored with closer people.

If you interacted more with Silcott people you identified with Silcott-you might live nearer to Peola but consider yourself to be “from” Silcott, whereas your neighbor a mile further towards Silcott might be “from” Peola. The distinction was made on the basis of neighboring. The boundary of the community was not a straight line on a map but instead a zig-zag patchwork of farmsteads. Economic ties of neighboring created social ties, which in tum created social boundaries and resulted in economic boundaries-a swing full circle.

Neighboring may be regarded from two aspects: practical and economic. From a practical standpoint it makes sense; some things cannot be done efficiently with a small number of people. Examples include major construction projects such as road building or barn building. With cooperation the work can be done. Similarly, but for different reasons, was the slaughtering of livestock. By alternating the slaughtering between several families, fresh meat was available more frequently without the need for either greater consumption or preservation. This is also a form of insurance. Giving away meat when you have it causes an indebtedness which can be claimed at a later time when you do not have any meat. The more persons indebted to you, the greater your security if some calamity descends upon your farm. Indeed, “many superficially odd village practices make sense as disguised forms of insurance” (Lipton 1968: 341). In later years farmers brought their own hogs and shared only the labor, not the meat.

The economic factor of neighboring is an important one, for in a society such as Silcott where there was little cash, labor was traded, not bought. Up until about 1910 labor was often traded on par, that is, you worked a day for someone and later he worked a day for you. No consideration of wage rates was


made. This resulted in capital gains without the expenditure of hard-to-come-by cash. Once a cash equivalence for work was mea- sured, the reciprocal relationship was under- mined. When work could be expressed in dollars, people were more reluctant “to be so beholden” to someone else. Wage labor was essentially limited to work in the big company orchard or the grain warehouse.

Neighboring, as a socio-economic entity, binds families and binds the community. It is a local network for the distribution of wealth in the form of goods and labor. Neigh- boring results in informal bartering disguised as gift giving and helping-visit a neighbor and bring some garden produce, help him build his barn. This relationship lasts, however, only if it is reciprocal. Reciprocity, whether it is formal or informal, must occur if neighboring is to be continued, if the dyadic social contract is to be fulfilled.

Probably the only area where archieology can study this local network of neighboring is in the sharing of slaughtered livestock. It is quite likely that certain families would ex- change a given unit of meat each time, say a quarter or side of beef, and that some pref- erence might be formed regarding the side of the animal exchanged. This behavior would largely be idiosyncratic, yet it might well be predictable. For example, each time Farmer A butchers a hog he gives the right front quarter to Farmer B. Farmer B returns the next time with a left front quarter for Farmer A. This kind of disparity should be revealed in the frequencies of the various bones in the archaeological site. For the sites excavated in Silcott, there is not, however, any kind of indication of this in the rather small faunal assemblage. The hypothesis is not negated; we are simply not in a position to test it. For some of the prehistoric sites in The Alpowa, Richard Lee Lyman (1976) has been able to document differential sharing on the basis of faunal remains recovered.

The local-commercial network in Silcott consisted of the interaction between the customers and the two general stores. Trying to

construct what these stores were like has been difficult because people remembered the stores from different time periods and the stores were changing throughout the time of occupation.

The country general store was the focal point for the entire community, but after about 1890 general stores began to decline (Carson 1965:279-280). The reason for this decline was a shift in orientation, socially and economically.

Mail order houses such as Sears Roebuck Company and Montgomery Ward Company took an increasing amount of the country store profit. This was particularly galling because the storekeeper was usually the postmaster as well. Even though Sears would sell merchandise in plain brown boxes, the storekeeper/postmaster usually knew the source. But there was not much to be done about it. Mail order houses offered much lower prices and greater variety than the country store could. Of course, the storekeeper did have some advantages-he could offer credit, something which the mail order places could not do until C.O.D. came into being. Mail orders were also subject to long delay, damage in transit, freight charges, and often cheap merchandise. The storekeeper had the advantage of having the merchandise where it could be examined. The biggest problem the storekeeper faced was competing with the tremendous variety to be found in mail order catalogs. The country store could only stock a small quantity and variety of merchandise.

The customers of the old general store did not expect to find each article at various grades and prices. The volume of business would not sup- port more than one kind of axe, one kind of rake, one quality of boot (Carson 1965:70).

The problem of variety was the reason for another competitor: the city store. Until the advent of a good system of roads, the country dealer had little competition from city stores:

Trading areas were established by the distance a farm family could travel by horse back, oxcart, or wagon. A circle with a five-mile radius would

106

represent a fair estimate of the amount of geo- graPhY in which a take a serious commercial interest (Carson 1965:23).

Because Silcott was so sparsely settled, the

Cliff Wilson built his general store about 1905; five years later, in 1910, his half-brother, Bill Wilson, built a general store two hundred yards to the north of CWs. Until about 1914 or

distance the which customers were so both stores competed with general merchandise but there was hardly enough business for one store much less both. Cliff was also the

was a pretty long ride postmaster so he had an additional Source of

to was greater-fifteen to twenty Interestingly enough, former residents

that five to visit someone. Even as late as the 1920’s, income. Bill Wilson expanded his operations using automobiles, “the farm to include a saloon and dance hall and grad-

for ually (though never completely) phased out his general merchandise line. Both places

On the average six to eight hardware, fourteen for furniture, and twenty for women’s fashions” rented out rooms for the night, though properly The advent Of good roads after speaking they were only beds. Cliff also diver-

and it took business away as well; but it always War I, a sign of impending doom for Silcott

along the south side of the river to Clarkston. The road would eliminate the two ferry trips

1965:290)’ War I

brought new business t’ the sified by putting in gasoline pumps after World

took more business than it brought in. appearing under the .guise of progress. Both for a new road stores eventually became only convenience in

stores. ‘<The old country trader found himself between wind and water, left with a shrinking

Or the Overland trip which was then business of low-profit necessities, the sugar, It the need for the salt, and the flour, and convenience goods

such as a pocket tin of smoking tobacco, a local general stores and eliminate many of the social ties binding the deck of Camels, cola drinks, and the overalls community together. It would make it possible that did not get on the shopping list when the

The ferry trip was so expensive that “farmers Judging from informants, descriptions of from southern Asotin County frequently cl. iffs from the early 1920’s until his death in made a three-day journey to Pomeroy’ be- 1937 and the closing of the store, very few

for people to go to town and family last visited the city” (Carson 1965:286).

lieving it sales were made. Cliff and Mollie Wilson had than to pay high ferry fees to nearby Lewiston” very few needs and desires, They could get

to go the long to market

by on next to nothing: food, and kerosene for (Anon. 1955:9). Facility of transportation was the single the lamp, were about all they needed. The store greatest factor in the dynamics of trading

was a shamble, the candy wormy, the food in networks. Distance was less of a factor than boxes either long since eaten by mice, or rotten. topography because the steep canyons re- One passerby stopped for gas and also bought stricted and constricted travel. Initially, the a box of crackers not opened for several miles- automobile did not necessarily make the trip one mouse, no crackers. easier. It did make it faster, but the automo- Cliffs role in the community was reinforced bile required good roads. However, the trip

by his role as postmaster. But even in its hey- to town did, eventually, become easier: day people tried to avoid purchasing major What the railroad did to the buffalo, the auto-

mobile did to the country merchandiser. Going items at his general store because they were to town meant riding to the nearest big com- shopworn and high-priced. Nevertheless, at munity, twenty to forty miles away, where there least in its first two decades, it was an impor- were full stocks of goods in all lines, better tant social and economic focal point for the prices for eggs and chickens, as well as movies, community. During the evening when Cliff barbers, dentists, lawyers, beauty shops, service

veniences of urban life (Carson 1965:281). around and gossip, and in the mid-1920’s stations-not just one facility, but a]] the con- “disturbed” the mail, people would gather


listen to his radio. Both Cliff and Bill figure greatly in local folklore, as culture hero and anti-hero. They both fit the model of a storekeeper as described by Gerald Carson (1965). Both sold goods which were not what they were actually supposed to be. For example, no matter what kind of motor oil you wanted, Cliff kept it in stock. Of course, it all came out of the one and only oil barrel. But in truth it was that oil, for he would add a little of the proper brands to keep from lying about it.

Bill Wilson’s was more of a convenience store after its first few years. His saloon and ice cream emporium provided income to supplement his gambling winnings. Bill’s Place was a male bastion. Women just did not go there much, because of the liquor, gambling, and perhaps even worse, dancing. One woman lived some thirty yards away but was never inside the store. She preferred to by- pass it for Cliffs. Bill oriented much of his business towards the harvest workers in the orchards and grain fields. He supplied them with food and clothing as well as with an en- tertainment center.

Both stores offered credit, but very judi- ciously. Informants stated that neither place offered credit, but continued to state that both “carried” certain people, especially just before harvest. Most likely their official policy was one of no credit, but those persons they were really familiar with could get credit. Because offering credit is risky, the store owner must either limit credit or limit business. Barbara Ward wrote about two general stores in a small Chinese fishing village which did not seemingly have enough business for two stores. The reason was the credit system: each storekeeper could know the personal finances of only about half of the village well enough to extend credit. This imposed a limit on the amount of business each storekeeper could safely maintain (Ward 1967:138). There is not enough evidence on the internal dynamics of Silcott to know if this was also a factor there. We know that they gave credit, but we do not know the limitations of it.

Another system for which there is only a

little evidence from Silcott is that of differential pricing. Country storekeepers marked their stock with a code system so they could offer a graduated price scale. This permitted them to fleece the wealthy passerby and give bargains to good customers and friends without blatantly advertising such to customers standing nearby. Several coding systems were used, some of the more popular ones are given by Carson (1965:92). It is likely that both Bill and Cliff used coding systems, but there is no evidence. We do know that they gave a better price or a greater measure to certain people, probably favored customers. Said one informant, “Bill gave more candy for the penny”. The lowering of the price paid for special customers or similarly the giving of greater quantities for the same price insured that customers continued business. The merchant gives up a little profit for increased security. Of course, this is done only if there is competition from other merchants. In a monopoly it would be unnecessary.

Sidney Mintz’s study of i, marketplace in Haiti gives us some insight into the relationship of preferential treatment (Mintz 1967). The special treatment given to certain customers he called pratik. Pratik strengthens the buyer-seller relationship and has a number of advantages: the trade is more predictable since the seller knows a certain part of the stock will be purchased; and the buyer knows the merchandise will be available at a good price. In open competition the merchant might receive more money but this would increase competition and substantially de- crease security. Furthermore, in hard times without the pratik relationship the seller would have less reliable income and the buyer no reliable source to obtain materials from. In other words, pratik is a means of increasing security by decreasing competition.

While a system like pratik can be offered as an explanation of how and why competition between the two Wilsons’ stores was possible it is probably not the explanation. Preferential pricing and giving better measure has been documented for American general stores by

108

Carson (1965) and has been inferred for Silcott from informants’ comments.

Archaologically we cannot say which items were purchased at a particular place. For example, we cannot tell if a medicine bottle found at Weiss Ranch Dump came from either of Silcott’s two stores. The reason for this is that there were too many places available for items to be purchased. Thus, we cannot ex- amine internal versus external economic factors through archxology. We cannot say that a certain percentage of the material recovered was originally purchased in Bill Wilson’s Store, a certain percentage from Cliff Wilson’s and a certain percentage from Lewiston merchants. We cannot approach it through written records or the ethnography, either.

Area merchants no doubt did a considerable business with people in Silcott. Merchants up the Snake River in Lewiston and Clarkston probably got most of the business, but merchants in the county seat, Asotin, surely re- ceived some trade. Occasional trips were made to Colton and Uniontown to sell produce, but that necessitated crossing the Snake and travel- ling about 15 miles up the meandering Steptoe Canyon to the uplands on the north side. In- frequent trips to Wawawai by buggy, train, or boat resulted in very little cash flow except, perhaps, in wagers when the Silcott Reds baseball team played Wawawai. For the people living higher up The Alpowa the economic orientation was directed somewhat towards the settlement of Peola, but when real purchases would be made they would probably go either to Pataha City or Pomeroy. Since about a third of the area covered by the Silcott community lies in Garfield county much of those people’s business took them to Pomeroy, the Garfield County seat, some twenty to thirty miles away. The people in the higher elevations of The Alpowa went to Pomeroy much more frequently than to Clarkston or Lewiston.

Only five artifacts were recovered in Silcott that were demonstrably from area merchants: three beer bottles from the Lewiston Bottling Works and two medicine bottles from the

Lewiston Owl Drug Store, but even these were made in the Midwest for those Lewiston merchants. One must bear in mind in the following sections that most items eventually reached Silcott by way of the merchants in Lewiston and Clarkston.

In terms of the archaeological evidence, we are on firmest ground when we deal with the regional and national networks from which Silcott ultimately derived its consumer goods. Just how did those networks appear from the perspective of the consumen in Silcott?

Based upon the archaeological evidence, the Northwest region produced little of the merchandise consumed in Silcott. Only the four primary nodes in the areal network are represented: San Francisco, Portland, Seattle, and Spokane. Spokane seems to be represented rather poorly considering its distance (100 linear miles) and ex-officio status as “capital” of the Inland Empire. Spokane was linked to the East via railroad on September 8, 1883 but it was not until September 9, 1898 that the Northem Pacific Railway reached Lewiston from Spokane (Meinig 1968:370; Anon. 19555). The Camas Prairie Railroad, built along the north side of the Snake River between Lewiston and Riparia, was finished in 1909 and com- pleted Lewiston’s link to the Northwest rail network (Meinig 1968 : 3 83).

Although railroads certainly facilitated the flow of goods into, and the flow of produce out of the region, the importance of water transport cannot be ignored. Steamboats ran the Lower Snake River between its confluence with the Columbia River and Lewiston from 186 1 until 1940. Because this eventually linked Lewiston (and hence Silcott) to Portland, Oregon, we should expect that economic orientation prior to 1898 should have been directed towards Portland much more than Spokane and Seattle. In other words, the primary node for Silcott would have been Portland until 1898, but after that date Spokane increasingly replaced Portland’s dominance. Seattle was probably less important than Spokane in terms of trade dynamics in the interior until the turn of the century. Certainly it was sub-


ordinate to Portland. Seattle’s base as a primary node was a result of trade with Alaska and the Orient, not with the interior of Washington.

Very few artifacts were identified as coming from the Pacific Northwest (Table 1). This is somewhat surprising-intuitively it seems there should be much more. The majority of artifacts from the four Northwest cities (Spokane, Seattle, Portland, San Francisco) generally are limited to extracts and spices, liquor, medicine, and work clothing. The place of manufacture for most artifacts was not determined; many artifacts could have come from the Northwest but since they were unmarked it could not be substantiated.

The archaeological information from Silcott provides valuable insight into purchase patterns. With Silcott we find goods produced in the East were not only economical to ship to Silcott but were also in demand there. Silcott was obviously tied in with the national economy via a complex distribution network. Although the degree of their interaction is difficult to measure, it must have been great.

The distribution map (Figure 2 ) shows the known location of each company which produced the artifacts found in Silcott, at the time they manufactured those artifacts. Each sym- bol reflects the number of each kind of company. The companies are concentrated in a broad belt reaching from the Midwest east- ward through southern New England. This concentration was, of course, the major American industrial center of the early twen- tieth century. This is not in itself surprising. Indeed, it should be expected. But, it is encouraging to see reality actually reflected in the archaeological record. What is surprising are the numbers of products which eventually reached Silcott.

Of the numbers of American products recovered in Silcott, a total of 1043 artifacts were identified to their place of manufacture. This represents 15.3% of the artifacts (other than nails) found in the excavations. This appears to be a sufficiently large enough sample to provide a view of Silcott’s participation in the national network. Tables 2 and 3 show

that 78.9% of the companies (which produced 87.8% of the products) were located at a distance exceeding 1000 miles from Silcott, and 75.2% of the companies (representing 77.4% of the products) were located at a distance exceeding 1500 miles. Clearly the majority of the identified products in Silcott originated at a long-range distance from there (Figure 3). These data suggest that the economic hypothesis put forth by Klein (1973) is probably not applicable outside of the major industrial region in the Northeast.

The evidence from Silcott shows that it was very much a part of the national distribution network. However, we really do not know all the links in that network. While straight line distance gives a useful measurement for comparison, it does not indicate the actual distance a product travelled. Material from the East Coast may have come to Portland by steamer, then to Lewiston by the Columbia-Snake waterway, or by rail. Products could also come from the east by rail but the evidence is nonexistent. The material from the Midwest likely came over the Northern Pacific Railway. The consumers in Silcott were no doubt affected by the trans- continental rad system, and later by the opening of the Panama Canal in 1914. Without comparative data from elsewhere in the Northwest, the relative impact of these events cannot be determined archaeologically, nor can the data from Silcott be seen in proper perspective. We can surmise that most material came by rail, but the exact route cannot be known. The routing through jobber and wholesaler, the hauling patterns, the warehousing, will all remain unknown. All we can say is that the system was successful in transporting the artifacts from production in the East to ultimate consumption in Silcott.

Mail order houses probably accounted for many of the cash purchases in Silcott. They likely would have done even more business except for their cash only policy. Cash was a rare commodity in Silcott. Until the 1910’s there was little cash in Silcott, but as commercial orchards developed and provided

110

jobs, and as homesteads were sold to the sheep company, the barter economy changed into a cash economy. Until that time people were in the lengthy process of acquiring enough land to survive on, for it took lots of land in most of Silcott to be successful-Silcott was nicknamed “Starvation Flat”, and for good reason. With cash they were able to increase their purchases from mail order houses such as Sears Roebuck and Montgomery Ward. While we know mail order was important, there is no way to discover just how important it actually was. The only definite mail order artifacts recovered were a liquor bottle embossed with the name of a Portland mail order house, and portions of three Sears catalogs. Although many other artifacts undoubtedly were mail order these could not be identified because most kinds of items available from mail order could be found in area stores as well.

It is not known where the coffee in a tin can in a Portland factory was grown. The tea came from Ceylon and the ginger from Africa.

Companies

SO

Products

0 0 0 0 0

‘ U ( Y

O D 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

s g s s s I I I I I

l P ! :

FIGURE 3. Percentages of companies and products by distance.

Silcott participated as ultimate consumer in a trade network which stretched around the entire world. From an archzological standpoint we can never really investigate the complex international networks because so much of the imported goods were raw materials. The few dozen artifacts known to have been imported to Silcott grossly under-represent the actual figures for consumption of materials derived from foreign sources. Many of the identified ceramic vessels recovered in Silcott were made in England, although some were made in Germany, Poland, and Japan (Table 1). Three ale bottles were made in England, while one was made in Germany. The only other foreign artifact identified was an English sheep shears.

Summary

The people of Silcott particpated in a hierarchy of economic and social networks linking them eventually to the rest of the United States and the rest of the world. Each level of this network hierarchy affected Silcott differ- ently and each level intermeshed with every other level. The “neighboring” in Silcott made possible a surplus of cash which could be used to purchase items at the local stores or the city stores. That cash eventually flowed outward from Silcott stimulating the economy of the region and the nation. The national and regional economy produced and distributed the manufactured items which eventually flowed inward to Silcott. This pendulum of commerce swung from all the other farming communities of the nation to the manufacturers and back to the communities creating a rhythm, a metronome for the nation. What happened in Silcott did affect the nation, because Silcott was linked through the social and economic networks to all the other small farming communities. For the same reason, the flood or fire which destroyed some New England mill town ultimately had an effect upon Silcott.

This paper outlined the expanding interaction spheres in which Silcott participated and the networks which bound those spheres


together. While considered separately here, they are in fact so woven as t o be, in reality, inseparable. The imported products found their way through the national, regional, local, and neighborhood networks. English shears cut the wool in Silcott; Brazilian coffee was sipped from Silesian cups, while Cuban sugar was stirred into the coffee by a spoon made in Connecticut, and the cup set upon a cotton cloth made in India covering a table made in Indiana bought from Sears. In the return, Silcott grain, fruit, and wool flowed outward from the farmers to the middlemen to the

REFERENCES

retailers. Silcutt provided grain for the sour- dough bread in San Francisco, apples for Denver, and the wool for Pendleton shirts.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

This paper is a slightly modified version of a chapter from my dissertation (Adams 1976). I would like to thank my committee members for their comments and criticisms: Frank C. Leonhardy, Robert Ackerman, Roderick Sprague, James Goss, and Mary Elizabeth Shutler. I am also indebted to Kjerstie Nelson and Eric Blinman for their assis- tance in manuscript preparation.

ADAMS, WILLIAM H. 1973 An ethnoarchreological study of a rural

American community: Silcott, Washington, 1900-1930. Ethnohistory, Vol. 20, pp. 335-346.

1975 Archreology of the Recent Past: Silcott, Washington, 1900-1930. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes, Vol. 9,

1976 Silcott, Washington: ethnoarchreology of a rural American community. Doctoral dissertation, Washington State University. University Microfilms, Ann Arbor.

ADAMS, WILLIAM H., LINDA P. GAW, AND FRANK C. LEONHARDY

1975 Archaeological excavations at Silcott, Washington: the data inventory. Reports of Investigations, No. 53. Laboratory of Anthropology, Washington State Uni- versity, Pullman.

pp. 156-165.

ANONYMOUS 1955 Jawbone Flat to Clarkston. Report of the

history committee. Clarkston Community Study, Part 4. Clarkston, Washington.

BRAND NAMES FOUNDATION 1947 43,000 Years ofpublic Service. Brand Names

Foundation, New York.

1965 The Old Country Store. E. P. Dutton, New York.

COLCLEASER, DONALD E.

CARSON, GERALD

1967 Bottles: Yesterday’s Trash, Today’s Trea- sures. Old Time Bottle Publishing Company. Salem, Oregon.

DAY-AMES. JACOUELINE n.d. Untitled manuscript on the ethnography

of Silcott. On file in the Department of 1967 Pratik: Haitian personal economic rela-

Anthropology, Washington State Uni- versity, Pullman.

GAW, LINDA P. 1975 The availability and selection of ceramics

in Silcott, Washington, 1900-1930. North- west Anthropological Research Notes, V O ~ . 9, pp. 166-179.

KLEIN, JOEL I. 1973 Models and hypothesis testing in historical

archaeology. Historical ArchrPology, Vol. 7, pp. 68-77.

LEONHARDY, FRANK C. AND JACQUELINE DAY-

1975 Silcott, Washington, 1890-1950: Anthro- pological perspectives on local history. Narrative report submitted to the National Endowment for the Humanities. Depart- ment of Anthropology, Washington State University, Pullman.

1968 The theory of the optimizing peasant. Journal of Development Studies, Vol. 4, pp. 327-35 1.

LYMAN, RICHARD LEE

h E S

LIPTON, MICHAEL

1976 A cultural analysis of faunal remains from the Alpowa locality. Master’s Thesis. Washington State University.

MEINIG, D. W. 1968 The Great Columbia Plain: A Historical

Geography, 1805-1910. University of Washington Press, Seattle.

1949 Culture and Agriculture: An Anthropological Study of a Corn-Belt County. University of Michigan Press, Ann Arbor.

MINER, HORACE

MINTZ, SIDNEY

112

tionships. In Peasant Society: A Reader, edited by J. Potter, M. N. Diaz, and G. M. Foster. Little, Brown, Boston.

PERIODICAL PUBLISHERS’ ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA 1934 Nationally Established Trademark. Periodical

Publishers’ Association of America, New York.

RIORDAN, TIMOTHY B. 1976 The Euroamerican component at Alpaweyma

( 4 5 ~ ~ 8 2 ) . Master’s Thesis, Washington State University. Silcott harvest 1931: a study of the individual through archzology. Northwest Anthropological Research Notes, In Press.

TOWLOUSE, JULIAN H.

n.d.

1971 Bottle Makers and Their Marks. Thomas

Nelson Company, New York. WARD, BARBARA

1967 Cash or credit crops? An examination of some inplications on peasant commercial production with special reference on the multiplicity of traders and middlemen. In Peasant Society: A Reader, edited by J. M. Potter, M. N. Diaz, and G. M. Foster. Little, Brown, Boston.

WHITE, JAMES SEELY 1974 The Hedden’s Store Handbook of Pro-

prietary Medicines. Durham and Downey, Portland, Oregon.

WASHINGTON STATE UNIVERSITY PULLMAN, WASHINGTON

trade networks and interaction spheres--a view from silcottusers.clas.ufl.edu/davidson/histarch/week...

Documents