Sedamsville Sanitation: Urban Archaeology
The last archaeology blog focused on the Queensgate II neighborhood (today known as the Betts Longworth Historic District) in Cincinnati. Queensgate’s growth started to take off in the 1830s. We saw a shift from largely mercantile/white collar neighborhood to a working class, lower-income population, which corroborated archival research. While this project occurred in Cincinnati, it focused on a period of development in an outer Cincinnati neighborhood. What would the socio-economic differences be between the neighborhoods? What additional information can the archaeological assemblage add to the archival history? Are there any similarities between this middle class neighborhood and Queensgate?
For this project, archaeologists were brought in prior to the expansion of River Road. A survey of the area which would be impacted by the project was conducted on 25 lots on the south side of River Road. Five of these properties had intact features at the time of the survey, including privies, cisterns and wells. These five features were recommended for further testing in Phase II of this project. Archival research and further testing (Phase II) revealed 5 historic-era archaeological sites within 7 parcels. Four of the five features still retained significant integrity which could yield potential data, making this area eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places. Based on archival research, the significant time range is 1860-1922; the dates in which the features were in use, and when the neighborhood developed. Phase III (this project) reveals what data was found and the interpretations made by this research team about the development of Sedamsville, the residents, and a glimpse into sanitation and health concerns of the residents. This project was completed by Michael Striker, Donna Bryant, James Pritchard, Rita Walsm, Lena Sweeten, Kevin Pape, Donald Miller and Bradley MacDonald. The report is titled, “Phase III Archaeological Investigations at Four Sites (33HA733, 33HA735, 33HA736, and 33HA737) in the Sedamsville Neighborhood Conducted for the River Road Improvement Project (HAM-US 50-17.69; PID 20176).” All information was taken from this report.
History of River Road
Sedamsville is located on the far west side of Cincinnati, on the Ohio River. Henry Sedam formed Sedamsville on land he inherited. Settlement began around 1795. In 1835 Storrs Township was formed, and Sedamsville was annexed to Cincinnati in 1870. The River Road neighborhood really took off following construction of the Cincinnati and Indiana Railroad in the early 1860s. Electric streetcar service replaced horse-drawn wagons by the 1880s, which brought yet another wave of residents. This increase in population can be seen in the architectural styles. If you look up River Road in Sedamsville on a street-view map, you can still see the architectural trends. Very decorative Queen Anne style houses sit at the rear of the lot along River Road. Originally, this provided a large front yard, a separation from the road with a stone wall, but still provided views of the Ohio River. By the turn of the 20th century, American Foursquare and Colonial Revival houses began to fill the front portion of the lots.
One of the stumbling blocks in the record search for the properties on this project, as with many projects, is deciphering whether the person who is listed in the property records is the person actually living in the house. This presented itself in two ways in this project; vague description from city directories (such as simply listing the family lived on River Road or in the 21st Ward instead of a specific address) and maps which did not match the city directory names and descriptions. Additionally, there were many cases in which the property was owned by one person but leased out to another family. All of these factors need to be considered when interpreting an archaeology site.
The properties were all once part of one big property, belonging to Ethan Stone. A prominent Cincinnatian, Stone spent part of his life in downtown Cincinnati and part of his time out “in the country” of Storrs Township. Not a lot of personal information was found about him; he was not found in the census records, and despite having owned property in Sedamsville, does not show up on the 1835 or1847 atlas maps. Stone does, however, hold the record for the longest ongoing court cases regarding the leasing out of his land; 160 years. If you do an internet search for Ethan Stone Land Case you should be able to find the details.
Fast Facts of Each Property
2823 River Road
Footprint of the property first appears on a map in 1869, at the time the property changed hands from Philip Munrath to John Drott. Drott was a stone mason, and an early partner with Charles Kuhl at Charles Kuhl Artificial Stone Company. The property was passed on to John’s daughter. The property was then sold to John Eckert; however it appears that Eckert rented out the property instead of residing at the property. Between 1916 and 1928 the B&O Railroad owned the property. The features are attributed to the time of Drott’s residency on the property.
Features on this property include a bottle-shaped cistern and a feature described by the authors as “brick over limestone paving,” which was located next to the current sidewalk. The artifacts from the cistern reveal that it had been used as a place for disposing household waste after the cistern went out of use. The largest artifact category represented is architectural. Definite mixing of layers occurred, which suggests a large house cleaning episode at some point on or after 1968 (based upon a 1968 penny found in the top strata). Therefore, little information directly linking the artifacts to specific residents of that property could be gleaned.
2739 River Road
The main structure on the property first appears on the 1883-1884 Cincinnati Atlas, however an outbuilding (privy) does not appear on a map until 1891. The 1904 map shows these buildings, however a slightly different location of the outbuilding. Property records are incomplete between 1839 and 1870, at which point Cyrus Coffin owned the property (though did not live on site). Cyrus’ son, Telemachus, sold the property to Frederick Myers in 1870. Based tax information and city directories, it appears the house (and outbuildings) were constructed during Myer’s time living on the property. Myer’s, a Cincinnati Policeman, and his family only lived there for three years, at which point they sold the property to Charles Kuhl. Kuhl and his family turned around and sold the property to John Tischbein (a shoe manufacturer and dealer) in 1875. While we know, based on city directories, that Tischbein lived and worked on Lower River Road, it cannot be certain that he lived (or worked) at this property. In the 1884 directory, Tischbein is listed at a few blocks away, and rented this property to their son. The city directory does list boarders living with the Tischbeins.
A dry-laid undressed limestone privy shaft was identified on this property. The upper portions were angled at approximately 30 degrees, instead of a straight vertical descent. The change took place at approximately 120cm below ground surface. For safety precautions, a trench was excavated around the privy during excavation. During this activity, a stone wall was discovered behind the privy. The base of the wall was at roughly the same level as the point where the privy angle changed. There were two major activity layers; backfilling and night soil. Night soil represents the deposits from when the privy functioned as a toilet. While the property was looted, it appears that the looters were likely only interested in whole bottles (redepositing much of the artifact assemblage). Housewares (including ceramics, lamp chimney glass, and cookware) were most common, followed by bone/ivory/shell (which includes food refuse), and lastly ceramic fragments. Smaller numbers of dolls, marbles, toys, bottles, architectural items, and clothing-related items were also recovered. Based on the artifacts found, it is suggested that this represents daily deposition. Foods represented show both a local presence, as well as being connected to an international food distribution network. Ceramic fragments show a preference for undecorated white ware.
2731 River Road
Much like 2739, this property has some gaps in knowing who actually resided on the property. John A. Bohrer (a basket weaver already living in the area) purchased the property in 1862. The first map available showing a house in that area is from 1869; however the city directories at that time were vague and therefore we do not know whether Bohrer actually lived at the house on the map. The 1884 atlas shows two buildings in the general location of this property, however neither building matches that of the 1869 map. John Bohrer’s heirs sold the property to August Wehmeier in 1886. Wehmeier ran a beer garden and bowling alley on River Road between 1864 and 1891, which would have been a few properties down the road. It is unclear whether Wehmeier resided at 2731 River Road, however they continued to live and work on River Road through the 20th century. The property was passed down to August’s daughter, who then sold the property out to her brother-in-law, Charles Wehmeier. Charles, an upholsterer, rented out the property and never resided there. By 1904 an outbuilding formerly on the property is gone and a new one-story frame building is present. The property continued to be rented out as it changed hands.
A privy dating circa 1900 was identified on this property. The privy was fully looted prior to excavations, therefore the artifacts were not in their primary context which leaves a gap in temporal interpretation. The wall mentioned in the earlier properties was also identified behind this privy. Due to the heavy looting of this privy, the representations of different categories of artifacts are likely skewed. Ceramics show a preference for undecorated wares. High amounts of fragments of glass from lamp chimneys, fragments of medicine bottles, and presence of kitchen waste demonstrate that disposal was gradual (daily, as opposed to one massive cleaning).
2723 River Road
In October 1849, the land was leased by Ethan Stone to Christian Krugle. The property remained in the family for decades. While Krugle’s name is on the deed, his name doesn’t appear on the census from 1840, 1850, or 1860, nor is there any reference to him in early county histories. He died intestate in 1869, at which time the property went to his daughter, Louisa Schmidt, nee Krugle. Based on city directories, the authors explain that it is likely the Schmidts lived at 2723 River Road, with Louisa’s husband (William) running a paint business out of the house. The 1891 map shows the house and a single large frame building identified as paint shop in the rear of the parcel. Like her father, very little information could be found about Louisa. Louisa died intestate in 1908, followed by William in 1914. The three children inherited equal portions of the property, but two of them sold their shares to the third, Stella. Stella owned the property, but her family lived up the block. Stella’s brothers each rented out the property for periods of time. The authors explain that Albert (one of Stella’s brothers) lived there from 1909-1919, after which it appears the house was not rented or occupied at all.
A privy was identified in the 1891 map. Today that spot was occupied by a driveway. A portion of the driveway was removed. Beneath, a square 2Mx2M stone lined privy was located. It is not known when it was built, but based on the neighboring privies and knowing when the area was plumbed for sewage, it was likely abandoned around 1922. Gravel, construction debris, cinders, coal and charcoal fragment were identified extending 1.35 Meters below ground surface. A quarter of the unit was further excavated to 2.72M below ground surface, at which point a large rock was encountered impeding further excavation. Most artifacts were limestone fragments, 84 pieces of linoleum or vinyl flooring were the second most common artifact. A few personal items including a doll marked “Germany”, liquor and medicine bottles, and a watch or locket lid were identified. The authors suggest that these artifacts were all deposited during a fill episode when the privy went out of use, and therefore little about day-to-day life of the residents could be learned.
2717 River Road
This property has the least definite residency history of the properties from this project. It appears that the house first appears on the 1869 map, however a lack of detail on the map makes it difficult to determine if this is the same property. At that point in time, Edward Bepler owned the property (along with many other lots along River Road), however the Bepler family rented out the property. Louis Hohendorf is listed as residing on “River Road west of Mt. Echo Road” between 1872 and 1886; in the area of this property, though not a specific address. Edward Bepler’s daughter, however, married Louis’ brother. Perhaps just a coincidence. While family members resided for brief periods of time, the majority of the residents were unknown renters. What we do know, however, is that on the 1883-1884 atlas, a frame rectangular building appears on the property. No outbuildings are shown and no owners are listed. The 1891 map shows a two-story frame dwelling with a one-story frame addition on the rear. An outbuilding, likely a privy, also appears on the property. This property was plumbed for sewage the first year available; 1919.
While this property has a certain lack of firm residential history, it has a unique archaeological feature; wooden privy vaults. Features 11 and12 are considered separate features (each a separate privy vault, but part of the same privy). The fill in each was also different. They were identified approximately 2 Meters below ground surface, during a backhoe excavation. Feature 11 contained three distinct layers, with the 3rd layer being the night soil, containing the heaviest amount of artifacts and organic material. Unlike the other privies mentioned earlier, there is a high representation of botanical and food refuse (food which had to be thrown away, not digested) and a low representation of domestic items like ceramics, glass, and personal items. This suggests that at least for the people who lived here during the time this privy was in use, it was not common practice to dispose of these domestic items here. This brings up the question of what people did with broken glass, ceramics, or clothing which could no longer be worn. The other vault (Feature 12), however, shows a different story. While kitchen slop was thrown out in this vault, a high number of unidentified metal items and fragments from vessel glass and bottles were identified. While Feature 11 had the highest concentration of artifacts at the bottom layer, Feature 12 had the highest representation on the first layer. It has been suggested that while there was a gradual deposition pattern for Feature 11, Feature 12 shows more of a house-cleaning event; a mass deposit.
One of the interesting parts, in my opinion, was the wall which was uncovered during privy shaft excavations. Additions to privy shafts were made at the same level as the base of the wall. This brings up the questions of whether they were linked and why the wall was buried. According to archival research, there was a series of massive floods between 1882 and 1884. This would explain the heavy amounts of soil accumulated on each property, and the need for creating an addition to heighten the privy shaft on each property. It also brings up questions, such as would the soil have filled the privy shafts? If this occurred, does this mean that the artifacts which were temporally mixed once in distinct layers or did the flooding have any mixing effect on the privy shafts?
Sanitation Laws and Attention to Health
American cities lagged behind when it came to sewage system modernization and drinking water sanitation laws. There were no regulations for privies or sanitation prior to 1867. Notes from the Cincinnati Board of Health in 1868 state, “In many parts of the city, privy vaults fill with water from springs and surface drainages, and not infrequently overflow into neighboring cellars and yards (6-7).” Laws were put in place explaining, “No butcher’s offal or garbage, nor any dead animals, nor any putrid or stinking animal or vegetable matter shall be thrown in any street, place or receiving basin, or into any standing water or excavation, or upon the ground of premises of any other person in the city.” Privies were to be cleaned by professionals, night soil was to be disinfected and removed. Ashes and cinders were separated and picked up 3 times per week. Following an outbreak of Cholera, the City revamped their laws again. People now needed to get a permit to dig privy, walls of the privy needed to be no less than 8 inches thick and constructed of stone or brick. The privy walls were to be water-tight, which may have been out of concern that the liquid from the privy vaults was leaching into the drinking water. Once the privies fell into disuse, they were “to be cleaned to the bottom and filled up with earth or other suitable material, such filling [was] to be done under the supervision of a sanitary office,” (Rowland 1886:129). It is not clear how well the ordinances were enforced.
Throughout the late 1880s and into the 1890s, thousands of reports were filed for full privies, improper cleaning, or leaking privies. It is not clear whether the sanitation laws required existing privies to be modified to comply with the regulations. If all the privy regulations were being followed, there would be no artifacts in the privy vaults. Plant and animal remains were found in all privy vaults. The most recent privy, constructed after the laws were implemented, was constructed of brick, but was only one course thick and only 9 feet deep. Since this privy was entirely looted and back filled by looters, it is difficult to say whether the vault was cleaned prior to abandonment. However, due to the number of artifacts recovered (by both this team as well as prior looting) it is safe to say probably not. The night soil layer was found in most of the privies, and while the privies were filled upon abandonment, they were not filled with clean earth. Additionally, with the flooding which occurred in the 1880s, assuming this is why the additions were constructed on privy shafts, what were the parameters around these projects? Was each household required to obtain a permit to build, or was it up to each homeowner to heighten their privy shaft, in accordance with maintenance regulations? This information could give additional insight into whether the outcome of the construction project was based on how much the resident could afford to pay for the addition, or whether they had the skills to build the addition. With this, we would need to know who paid for the maintenance; the property owner or the renter.
While the privies appear to not follow sanitation laws and regulations, it does appear that the residents had a concern for their health. As many know, a large amount of the medicines available during this time were laced with morphine, alcohol, or other addictive elements. Many of the medicines were advertised to cure a range of ailments (as opposed to a specific issue). Looking at the artifact assemblage recovered, and knowing that many more bottles were likely looted, this addictive trend is confirmed. When medicinal bottle showed up in the assemblage, more than one bottle of specific types were often found. This suggests either the medicine actually worked, or people were hooked on them. Similarly, the presence of clear glass milk bottles and mineral water bottles could suggest a concern for the sanitation and contamination of available local water and of milk.