Welcome to the Toilet!

The Death of Odor

Mar 8, 2021 | Research | 0 comments

An Analysis of Reducing Stench Through Bathroom Design

1. Privy cleaners cleaning out a full cesspool. (Wright)

Introduction

In medieval times, prior to the advent of closed sewer systems and indoor flush toilets, latrines in both the private and public sphere dealt with the issue of stench. As the odor and health issues became worse, latrines odor control and disease prevention. This analysis reveals the harms caused by these odors as well as the ways in which design reduced odor in personal and public realms.

2. Revealing the proximity of excrement to tight living quarters. (Wright)

The Politics of Stench

Cited by multiple sources throughout history, the stench of waste disposal was cause for complaints and even indictment in many cases. In Modernity and Medieval Muck, Jørgensen writes that 24 out of 252 cases of complaints were directed at the locations of latrines. (227) The nuisances and complaints of odor and inconvenience were all too common in medieval London, bringing the problems to the city officials and mayors. This common complaint was a result of no centralized sewer or waste management system, as each household or housing group dealt with waste in their individual way, inconsiderate of the effect on passersby and neighbors to the waste. The creative solutions of each household resulted in the accumulation of waste in the public gutters, which as a result, would become backed up with waste. (Sabine 311-313)

The disposal of waste onto public areas became so bad that a royal edict declared households must have a personal cesspool in just three months time as a means to eliminate public disposal of waste. (Laporte 11) Although this edict was likely enforced, the shift to private cesspools temporarily diverts the problem until the smells affect neighbors, like in the image seen above. The personal disposal of waste led to odor, disease, financial upkeep, and other problems, many of which would not be solved until centralized sewer systems came about later in history. Even then, Laporte remarks, the ideal of “no trace of waste” was a barrier to manage the waste in the first place. (Laporte 13) The ideal is merely that, an ideal, which cannot be achieved in the ways that perhaps we make it out to be. A total concealment of waste might be possible to keep feuding neighbors at bay, but odor is a tell-tale sign that concealment is much different than elimination.

3. Water pollution as represented by this design for a fresco reading “Father Thames Introducing His Offspring to the Fair City of London (Diptheria, Scropula, Cholera)” (London Stink)

Deadly Odor

In addition, one author even writes that the putrid smell is “the true source of an infinity of evils which afflict humanity.” (Patent 4) The massive population of London was too much for the capacity of privies, which would often lay stagnant and full of excrement. The stench was cause for a variety of illnesses which afflicted people of all ages, classes, and sexes because despite many public latrines used only by lower classes, the smell infiltrated the city for all to experience. (Patent 8-9) As remarked in the design for a fresco above, the disease ridden waterways and privies were host to diphtheria, scropula, and cholera to name a few. (London Stink) The stench and dangers of latrines were also major contributing factors for fevers, dysentery, conjuntivitis, and chronic stomach aches. (Patent 6)

 

4. A look at the double pan system developed to separate solid and liquid waste. (Edwards)

Design Solutions for Odor-Control

Sir John Harrington’s design for a toilet filled a bowl with water to cover the odor of the waste in the bowl, and once filled with waste, could be diverted into a cesspool. (Sabine 313) This invention directed design as a solution to the issue of odor which plagued both public and private latrines alike. As the invention and designing of toilets advanced, the toilet became safer to use and be around. The disposal of waste in this way allowed for less disease to be spread through the toilets themselves and illness related to the stench of excrement. Harrington’s design reveals one way which function directly inspires design and design becomes the solving agent. By the end of the 18th century, fosses mobiles, or transportable latrines prevented the fermentation of excrement and urine by separating the two in different basins, which reduced the odors emitted from latrines. (Patent 11) What we would now think of today as comparable to Porta-Potties, these fosses mobiles worked to combat odor directly while making the cleaning of such latrines safer for those tasked with disposing and sanitizing. This seemingly simple solution allowed for greater freedom in the aesthetics of toilet design later on, because the design first and foremost directed to function as the top priority.

5. Highlighted on the left: the sink basin, water storage, and rolling towel nearby eating quarters. (Wright)

Personal Cleanliness

In the realm of odor, cleanliness, and bathrooms, the addition of structured bathing during the Middle Ages was formative to the culture of cleanliness we see even today. Handwashing was one of the ways of maintaining personal cleanliness, designed particularly and not dissimilar to what we see today. A small sink, as seen in the image above, served as a basin and catchment for the water container mounted above. In addition, a towel hung on a rod served as the method for drying one’s hands after the washing and was a lengthy design to encourage rolling the towel after every use to allow each person to have a dry towel. (Wright 38) This system is very similar to our current system of a sink with a faucet, with either a hand towel or paper towel roll nearby. 

Medieval baths combatted the odors of the individuals more than the odor of the collective, as privies did more so as public entities. As with the latrines, baths were more common in monasteries before other private and public domains at large. For monasteries, the baths could be large enough for the monks to use the hot water simultaneously for various cleaning and grooming. As baths entered more into the private realm of castles and households of nobles, the baths were often wooden tubs which would be filled with hot water and adorned with various perfumes.

6. Three women enjoying a bath together and a man willing to jump in with them. (Wright)

Social Bathing

Due to the conditions of cleanliness, or lack thereof, in medieval times, hand washing was prioritized before meals especially among nobles. (Wright 34) This routine washing before meals could incorporate social aspects – meals with a large gathering of people, washing at the same time as a potential love interest, sharing the bowl with one’s neighbor at the table. These various social aspects brought attention to a personal display of cleanliness. (Wright 35)

Concluding Thoughts

The quest to eliminate odor in the realm of hygiene took many innovative ideas and solutions, however, much of the progress relied on political upheaval and disease and death to reach change. Many solutions involved the individual – private latrines, personal handwashing and bathing, etc. – in order to impact the collective and the issues caused by waste management and odor.

Bibliography

Jørgensen, Dolly. “Modernity and Medieval Muck.” Nature and Culture, vol. 9, no. 3, 2014, pp. 225–237. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43304068.

Laporte, Dominique. History of Shit. MIT Press, 2000.

“Patent of Importation in [Sic] the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Fosses Mobiles Inodores, or Privies Transportable and without Odour, of the Invention of Mr. Cazeneuve, and the Fabrication of the Calcarious [Sic] Urine, and Fine Sifted Dung, by the Process in Chemistry of Mr. Donat : Fauche-Borel & Co : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Internet Archive, [London], 1 Jan. 1970, pp. 4-20, archive.org/details/b30354900/page/6/mode/2up. 

Sabine, Ernest L. “Latrines and Cesspools of Mediaeval London.” Speculum, vol. 9, no. 3, 1934, pp. 310–317., doi:10.2307/2853898.

Wright, Lawrence. Clean and Decent: The Fascinating History of the Bathroom & the Water Closet and of Sundry Habits, Fashions & Accessories of the Toilet Principally in Great Britain, France, & America. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. Chapters 3 & 4, pp. 23-54.

Image 1: Wright, Lawrence. Clean and Decent: The Fascinating History of the Bathroom & the Water Closet and of Sundry Habits, Fashions & Accessories of the Toilet Principally in Great Britain, France, & America. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. pp. 52.

Image 2:Wright, Lawrence. Clean and Decent: The Fascinating History of the Bathroom & the Water Closet and of Sundry Habits, Fashions & Accessories of the Toilet Principally in Great Britain, France, & America. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. pp. 51.

Image 3: “London’s Great Stink.” Historic UK, www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Londons-Great-Stink/.

Image 4: Edward S. Philbrick, “Lecture XI: Apparatus Used for House Drainage,” American Sanitary Engineering (New York: The Sanitary Engineer, 1881), pp. 117.

Image 5: Wright, Lawrence. Clean and Decent: The Fascinating History of the Bathroom & the Water Closet and of Sundry Habits, Fashions & Accessories of the Toilet Principally in Great Britain, France, & America. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. pp. 40.

Image 6: Wright, Lawrence. Clean and Decent: The Fascinating History of the Bathroom & the Water Closet and of Sundry Habits, Fashions & Accessories of the Toilet Principally in Great Britain, France, & America. Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1960. pp.43.

Latrines in Medieval and Pre-Industrial England

Feb 13, 2021 | Research | 0 comments

An account of the accessibility, odor, and sanitation of latrines throughout the 15th-18th c. in primarily London and the surrounding areas.

 

Plaque advertising fosses mobiles or transportable privies. (Fantelin)

Introduction

In medieval London, prior to the advent of closed sewer systems and indoor flush toilets, latrines became a creative addition to both the private and public spheres. With what would be considered now as no technology to flush waste, flowing water became an integral part to latrines. As the odor and health issues became worse, latrines focused on accessibility and odor control and began to use systems other than sole water disposal.

 

 

 

Latrines

Sir John Harrington may have been the first to develop the first waste system similar to the one we have today. The accumulation of rainwater in a large tank would allow for a constant supply of water without proximity to a river or stream. The tank’s valve would allow water to fill a bowl at certain times to cover the odor of the waste in the bowl, and once filled, could be released into a cesspool. Similar to modern water closets and flush toilets, this system dealt with odor, water for flushing, and prevented an abundance of waste in the public gutters. (Sabine 313) 

Latrines in the end of the Middle Ages could be found between buildings and in alleys of cities, tucked away in the narrow lanes but close enough for easy access. These latrines were designed with removable walls in the box-like shape we would think of now like an outhouse, which could allow waste to be removed from the latrine when full, smelly, or overflowing. The waste, for these latrines removed from water, would be transported and disposed of away from the living areas of the cities. (Jørgensen, Sanitation, 563-564)

As time went on, latrine design became more advanced and flexible in arrangement within cities and households. For instance, by the end of the 18th century, fosses mobiles, or transportable latrines, became popular within England and France. These movable privies prevented fermentation by separating excrement and urine, which reduced the odors emitted from latrines. (Patent 11) In addition, the catchments were hermetically sealed to avoid leaks and other disastrous occurrences that were common among the previous systems. (Patent 12) The system worked by dividing the waste and through a series of catchments and bowls and pans which allowed waste to pass without the lingering smell which had been cause for abundant issues in medieval London. This system can be seen in the diagrams below. (Edwards)

 

 

 

Sketch depicting the system of waste disposal in fosses mobiles. (Galtier-Boissière)

Pan system to separate excrement from urine and avoid fermentation and odor. (Edwards)

Stench

Cited by multiple sources throughout history, the stench of waste disposal was cause for complaints and even indictment in many cases. In Modernity and Medieval Muck, Jørgensen writes that 24 out of 252 cases of complaints about locations of latrines. (227) The “nuisances” and complaints of odor and inconvenience were all too common in medieval London, bringing the problems to the city officials and mayors. This common complaint was a result of no centralized sewer or waste management system, as each household or housing group dealt with waste in their individual way, inconsiderate of the effect on passersby and neighbors to the waste. The creative solutions of each household resulted in the accumulation of waste in the public gutters, which as a result, would become backed up with waste. (Sabine 311-313)

Different diseases from the contaminated Thames River, “a design for a fresco in the New House of Parliament.” (London Stink)

One author even writes that the putrid smell is “the true source of an infinity of evils which afflict humanity.” (Patent 4) The massive population of London was too much for the capacity of privies, which would often lay stagnant and full of excrement. The stench was cause for a variety of illnesses which afflicted people of all ages, classes, and sexes because despite many public latrines used only by lower classes, the smell infiltrated the city for all to experience. (Patent 8-9) As remarked in the design for a fresco above, the disease ridden waterways and privies were host to diphtheria, scropula, and cholera to name a few. (London Stink) The stench and dangers of latrines were also major contributing factors for fevers, dysentery, conjuntivitis, and chronic stomach aches. (Patent 6)

Sanitation

With the effects of disease and stench, latrine designs required sanitation and methods of upkeep. Private latrines, belonging only to people of nobility or wealth in the Middle Ages, would use a local running water supply as an open sewer system. This did not come without cost, the waterways to be cleaned required an annual fee to pay for cleaners. (Sabine 310) Of the 200,000 privies in London, about 10,000 worked in tandem with water and were considered to be water closets. (Patent 5) These water closets were much safer for humans but contaminated water supplies. The urine and other waste runoff would percolate into both above-ground and underground waterways, contaminating water supplies for drinking water. (Patent 10)

 The matter of cleanliness, more a matter of odor and built up waste, was dealt with by paid privy-cleaners who worked during the night hours. Unfortunately, cesspools used by the poor would be within the same unit as the privy, in which the floor was the only separation between the privy and cesspool below. This led to numerous accidents and deaths of those sitting and those cleaning. (Sabine 314-317) The deaths of workmen were numerous from the dangers of emptying the privies when full and falling in or the residual effects of inhaling and touching the filth. (Patent 8)

Conclusion

England throughout the Middle Ages and pre-Industrial Revolution dealt with a slew of issues and solutions regarding public access to latrines, odor, and sanitation. These inventions and advances contribute a large part to the history of the toilet today.

Bibliography

Jørgensen, Dolly. “Cooperative Sanitation: Managing Streets and Gutters in Late Medieval England and Scandinavia.” Technology and Culture, vol. 49, no. 3, 2008, pp. 547–567. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/40061427. 

Jørgensen, Dolly. “Modernity and Medieval Muck.” Nature and Culture, vol. 9, no. 3, 2014, pp. 225–237. JSTOR, www.jstor.org/stable/43304068.

“Patent of Importation in [Sic] the United Kingdom of Great Britain. Fosses Mobiles Inodores, or Privies Transportable and without Odour, of the Invention of Mr. Cazeneuve, and the Fabrication of the Calcarious [Sic] Urine, and Fine Sifted Dung, by the Process in Chemistry of Mr. Donat : Fauche-Borel & Co : Free Download, Borrow, and Streaming.” Internet Archive, [London], 1 Jan. 1970, pp. 4-20, archive.org/details/b30354900/page/6/mode/2up. 

Sabine, Ernest L. “Latrines and Cesspools of Mediaeval London.” Speculum, vol. 9, no. 3, 1934, pp. 310–317., doi:10.2307/2853898.

 

Image Sources

Edward S. Philbrick, “Lecture XI: Apparatus Used for House Drainage,” American Sanitary Engineering (New York: The Sanitary Engineer, 1881), p. 117. 

Fantelin, André. Fosses Mobiles Inodores, parismyope.blogspot.com/2010/11/fosses-mobiles-inodores.html.

Galtier-Boissière, Emile. Illustrated Dictionary of Usual Medicine, 1902. 

“London’s Great Stink.” Historic UK, www.historic-uk.com/HistoryUK/HistoryofBritain/Londons-Great-Stink/.

Latrines in Medieval London

Feb 1, 2021 | Research | 4 comments

Medieval Privies

The seat of a medieval toilet which opens up to a moat below. (Dirk Baltrusch)

Medieval London Privies

In medieval London, prior to the advent of closed sewer systems and indoor flush toilets, latrines became a creative addition to castles, palaces, and the public sphere. With what would be considered now as no technology to flush waste, flowing water became an integral part to latrines. Latrines focused on accessibility and odor control, first among the private households of nobility, then into the public streets of London.

  • Waste in medieval London was dealt with in a variety of manners. Creative solutions to waste included latrines and privies attached to systems of flowing water or cesspools, embedded in walls, near chimneys for warmth, attached to cisterns of rainwater.
  • Before sewers and modern indoor toilets, waste was a common nuisance among the general public, as household waste often polluted public gutters or the stench of cesspools irritated neighbors. This continued on for centuries after the Middle Ages.

Garderobes

Garderobes, or latrines, in medieval castles became innovative with the disposal of waste, embedding passages within or in combination with pre-existing systems. For example, the moat became a common mode of waste disposal while also serving as a barrier for protection of the castle. Latrines would often jut out from the wall over the moat as seen in the image to the left. This also allowed for latrines to be embedded within the thick walls of the castle, simultaneously dealing smells and privacy, which the image below represents from an interior view. Another innovative solution during the cold winter months, combined latrines with near chimneys. There could be two flues – one for smoke and the other for waste – and keep the user warm while taking care of business. Cesspools would suffice in instances with no water available. These solutions were a result of no sewer system, a later invention, but many did involve the use of water to flush out waste. The focus of these solutions was primarily on accessibility and odor control before the advent of sewers. (303-306)

 

 

 

A garderobe in the Tower of London (Huxham)

Medieval cesspool aproximately 15 feet deep (MOLA)

Cesspools

 Sir John Harrington may have been the first to develop the first waste system similar to the one we have today. The accumulation of rainwater in a large tank would allow for a constant supply of water without proximity to a river or stream. The tank’s valve would allow water to fill a bowl at certain times to cover the odor of the waste in the bowl, and once filled, could be released into a cesspool. Similar to modern water closets and flush toilets, this system dealt with odor, water for flushing, and prevented an abundance of waste in the public gutters. (313)

Cesspools, like the one above, remained a common waste disposal system throughout medieval London with the attachment of privies, or outhouses. The matter of cleanliness, more a matter of odor and built up waste, was dealt with by paid privy-cleaners who worked during the night hours. Unfortunately, cesspools used by the poor would be within the same unit as the privy, in which the floor was the only separation between the privy and cesspool below. This led to numerous accidents and deaths. (314-317)

Latrines

Latrines were not just used by royalty, high clergy, and nobility, but reached the public sphere in the 1200s. Public latrines and tenant latrines served the masses, but in small numbers compared to the population of people. At most, three latrines would be provided for a large tenement housing block, but also sometimes not at all, in which case, tenants would use one of the public latrines in London. Sixteen latrines in London were mentioned throughout history, one of which being the London Bridge. This of course was due to the fact that the bridge, and many of the other latrines, was built near running water – perfect for the disposal of waste. However, private latrines, belonging to people of nobility or wealth, would system their own running water as a type of open sewer system. This did not come without cost, the waterways to be cleaned required an annual fee for the cleaners. (306-310)

The monetary price was not the only cost to latrines, the stench was cause for complaints and even indictment in many cases. The “nuisances” and complaints of odor and inconvenience were all too common in medieval London, bringing the problems to the city officials and mayors. This common complaint was a result of no centralized sewer or waste management system, as each household or housing group dealt with waste in their individual way, inconsiderate of the effect on passersby and neighbors to the waste. The creative solutions of each household resulted in the accumulation of waste in the public gutters, which as a result, would become backed up with waste. (311-313)

Bibliography

Sabine, Ernest L. “Latrines and Cesspools of Mediaeval London.” Speculum, vol. 9, no. 3, 1934, pp. 303–321., doi:10.2307/2853898.

Images Cited:

Huxham, Trevor. Garderobe, Tower of London, 06 June 2018. Flickr. https://www.flickr.com/photos/ferrariguy90/3388183916 

MOLA. Secrets of the cesspit: Courtauld excavation reveals remnants of 15th century residence, MOLA. https://www.mola.org.uk/blog/secrets-cesspit-courtauld-excavation-reveals-remnants-15th-century-residence

University of Oregon • School of Architecture and Environment • IARC 475/575 • History of Interior Architecture II • Winter 2021 • Solmaz Kive