Subject: | |
From: | |
Reply To: | |
Date: | Thu, 13 Nov 1997 09:57:23 -0500 |
Content-Type: | text/plain |
Parts/Attachments: |
|
|
In a message dated 97-11-13 08:16:58 EST, Carl Steen wrote:
<< First, I can't think of a single example of a rural privy on 17th-mid-19th
century sites in SC. I think that the nearby woods were used. >>
Well, might as well take this another step away from D'Agostino's original
post and bring up _landscape_. Seems to me "nearby woods" could have been
pretty far away on most rural sites, given the desire to clear land for
planting and the ever-present needs for firewood. Thinking that people would
have left clumps of otherwise "useless" woods near their homes just to
provide a private spot seems like another ill-advised application of present
day sensibilities. Maybe topography mattered more - heading down into the
ravine or drainage to get out of the most obvious sight lines. I know that
in the early nineteenth-century people like Andrew Jackson Dowling were
advocating neat little farmsteads (with privies? don't recall seeing those
on such plans) with carefully placed plantings here and there, but I doubt
such high designs were having much effect on the typical hardscrabble
operations. Maybe in terms of everything else that had to be done to sustain
a household before modern convenience came on the scene such bodily functions
didn't warrant much fuss.
Best,
Larry McKee
|
|
|