HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Sender:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
From:
Cathy Spude <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Fri, 8 Mar 2002 09:11:52 -0700
MIME-version:
1.0
Content-type:
text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Reply-To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (62 lines)
On 03/07/02 08:41 Daniel H. Weiskotten wrote:


Census records reveal that the primary occupants of the local hotels in the
1870s through at least 1920 were actually long-term renters who were
tradesmen in the local shops and not overnighters, although there were also
plenty of overnight boarders and travelers listed in one registry that
survives.

I know we've all wandered far from the original query that started this
thread (syntheses of data about taverns), but we're obviously fascinated
with the subject. Since I dealt a bit with hotels in my dissertation, I
can't resist sticking my nose in from time to time.

Dan and others: You might check with the instructions sent out to the
census takers. If I remember correctly, I think you will find they were
told to not count the people who were merely guests at the hotel, but only
the residents. "Residence" was probably defined differently for each
census, so you might have to get the instructions for the census you're
looking at. If you want to know about all guests, not just residents, then
you probably can't use just the census records, because I think the
temporary guests were exempt from being counted.

The registries that Dan references are probably much more accurate
portrayals of total guest lists.

So, if I remember right, I might argue with Dan's assertion that the
"primary" occupants of hotels in the 1870's to 1920 were long-term renters,
because all he looked at was the census records, which might have excluded
overnighters. The one registry that he DOES have indicates there WERE
plenty of overnighters.

I know everyone's local situation is somewhat different. I tried to study a
little bit bigger area: the entire Rocky Mountain mining west. The studies
I did of that same time period indicate that there were some longer term
residents (a few weeks or months at a time) but mostly people stayed a few
days then moved on. That doesn't mean that the highly mobil mining
population is going to be the same as the one found in lovely Cazenovia,
NY.

By the way, "hotel" was the term of choice for overnight accomodations, and
"saloon" (or very occassionally "bar") the term of choice for drinking
establishments from 1880 to 1920 in the Rocky Mountains northwest to the
Pacific coast and Alaska. (And as one of my Southwestern colleagues has
pointed out, the Southwest had its own additional terms of which I have
limited expertise, so forgive my not listing those as well.)

Hoping to start a new thread, (but lets behave ourselves) "Resort" or
"Gentlemen's Resort" was a term for a place that mixed gambling and
drinking. I'm not quite sure how it was different than a saloon, unless it
included prostitution as well. I do have some limited evidence for that
before about 1904 when the federal officials really starting enforcing both
anti-prostitution and anti-gambling laws. I've just seen the term used in
Alaska in the very early 20th century. Has anyone out there seen the term
used elsewhere? Anyone out there got some (serious!) ideas about what else
went on (that we can print and that will make it past our screen-out
utilities?) (Serious from this bunch? Get real, Cathy...)


Cathy Spude
[log in to unmask]

ATOM RSS1 RSS2