|
Interpretations
and Conclusions
The first
season of excavation at the Nate Harrison site definitively answered four
of the initial questions posed at the outset of this report. The brief
explanation that follows will reiterate the answers to the queries:
• Is this Nate Harrison’s homestead?
• Does the site have a date range of ca. 1850-1920 based on the
archaeological remains?
• Is there archaeological evidence of a pre- or post-Harrison occupation
at the site?
• Are the visible stones that slightly protrude out of the site
area in fact remnants of the foundations to the Harrison cabin?
The site excavated by Dr. Mallios and his SDSU crew in the summer of 2004
was undoubtedly the cabin occupied by Nate Harrison during the late 19th
and early 20th centuries. Spatial, temporal, and formal analyses repeatedly
verify this assertion. Historical documents pinpoint the site’s
geographic boundaries, and historical photographs of the cabin have a
one-to-one correlation with the site’s archaeologically exposed
rock foundation. The chronology produced by the excavated artifacts forms
a secure 1865-1916 site occupation span that is corroborated by the 1892-1920
range detailed in the historical records. There is minimal evidence of
temporal contamination due to previous or subsequent occupations at the
site. Many of the exhumed artifacts, like the watch fob, leather boot,
and tobacco-pipe mouthpiece, have specific parallels in the historical
photographs. Overall, archaeological dimensions of space, time, and form
establish the excavation area as the Nate Harrison cabin site.
The fifth and final research question posed in the initial set of inquiries—“How
do insights gleaned from this site compare with the established stories
of Harrison’s life?”—is more difficult to answer at
this preliminary stage of the project. Some of the material finds are
remarkably consistent with the written narratives and oral histories regarding
Nate Harrison. His purported rugged frontier existence is reified by a
wide variety of mismatched utilitarian goods. It is worth noting that
none of the ceramics form a matching set, nor do the glass bottles or
utensils. However, the material record also reveals some inconsistencies
with the established narratives regarding Harrison. A few of his goods
were surprisingly ornate (silver-plated silverware), and others were manufactured
in cities far from his mountain cabin (Murine Eye Remedy produced in Chicago,
Gordon’s Gin made in London, etc.).
The first season of excavation has also raised many new questions. First
and foremost is whether the exhumed materials from the site represent
the total temporal occupation of the site or just the last decades of
Harrison’s life on the mountain. Since the patio area contained
the majority of the artifacts, and since the depth of this deposit is
unknown, it is impossible at this point to ascertain the time depth of
the site.
The overview of the primary historical documents and photographs has also
brought up a host of new issues. One goal of next year’s technical
report is to summarize the secondary sources that detailed Harrison’s
time in the region and on the mountain. Of particular interest will be
his link to Lysander Utt, the man who allegedly owned Harrison when he
was a slave and brought him to California.
A
final note ...
Nate Harrison
is commonly referred to as the first African-American settler in San Diego
County, dating as far back as 1850. The results of the historical research
and preliminary archaeological excavations presented here, do not definitively
place Harrison on Palomar Mountain until 1892. While it is possible that
Harrison was living on the mountain earlier than this, his appearance
in the 1880 census at two locations other than his own homestead on the
hillside and his patent on land at Rincon in the 1870s suggest that he
did not maintain a full-time residence on Palomar Mountain until at least
the 1880s.
Yet Harrison’s legend persists for reasons other than the date of
his arrival on the mountain. The evolution of his near mythic status raises
questions as to why Harrison has been so widely celebrated by San Diegans
over time, especially through the historical photographs (Figure 138).
This project has far to go before it uncovers the meaning of Harrison’s
popularity and his numerous photographs, but it has begun to put these
images and the legend of Nate Harrison into proper archaeological context
(See Balter 2005:324).
Close
this window to return to Archaeological Field Methods
|
