I’ve seen maps of London at around this time and it is tiny compared to what it is now. Was the population density a lot higher? Did there used to be taller buildings? It seems strange to imagine so many people packed into such a small space. Ty
In: 7459
Tenements, single occupancy rooming houses, and much smaller apartments. People today have much more individual space on average.
Much higher population density, Families of 6-8 in a single room, 4-5 families to a house… lots of documentation
https://victorianweb.org/history/slums.html#:~:text=They%20became%20notorious%20for%20overcrowding,vice%20of%20the%20lower%20classes.
Not specific to London, but here in North America population densities were crazy high per square meter of city space vs what we have now. Like a factor of 20x higher.
Throughout the 1920s several of the ‘problematic’ city ordinances that urbanists like to hate on came into effect. They came into effect to effectively ban or break up many of the dwelling that were catering to the underclass. As an example, there were rooming houses dotted all over where one could rent a mattress on the floor for as little time as a night for what amounted to a couple bucks in today’s money. These houses would be stuffed to full of migrant workers and other assorted poor people. Basically they were dens of disease, crime and filth and poverty. They also represent the market providing shelter for the bottom of the barrel and for those who may not have the right skin tone to stay in better accommodations.
So, in parallel with the introduction of the car, the city passed zoning laws that forbade these places. Now there were max limits to how many people could stay in a dwelling. This shut down the boarding houses because the landlord can’t make a go of it without jacking rates. (If you can’t have 100 people paying a dollar per night, then you need to find one guy to pay 100 per night.)
There were zones that industrial activity could take place and they must be separated from where people lived forcing folks to travel longer distances from home to job. People use to have ‘servant’ quarters in their back yard, but banned.
This is kind of a poor explanation, but hopefully it gives some kind of a sense of what happened.
At the end of the day, some of the changes were needed to combat rampant social disorder, but many of the changes were pushed to the extreme in order to try and entirely eliminate the ‘undesirable’ parts of the population. The problem has been that we’ve now created a system that nobody but the rich can afford to live.
“Packed” is the right word. Most of them were workers who earned barely enough to stay alive. That made for very tight living arrangements. [Wiki picture](https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/Jacob_Riis%2C_Lodgers_in_a_Crowded_Bayard_Street_Tenement.jpg/782px-Jacob_Riis%2C_Lodgers_in_a_Crowded_Bayard_Street_Tenement.jpg) For more pictures, try “lodging house” or “tenement”
The best modern equivalent would probably be the coffin homes in Hong Kong, though at least people there have *some* personal space. In 1900 London “privacy” was an utter luxury.
Not sure if it’s available on BBC Iplayer anymore, you may have to dig around for it. The Victorian Slum was a reality show where modern day people tried to survive in a simulated slum. Really good programme, highly recommend
How London was defined has also changed. By 1900 most of the tube stops were built and London had progressed from small city to sprawling city. A lot of people lived in in London, but also out of London (but still in London, like Watford)
It’s not a coincidence that the world first underground rapid transit line — the [Metropolitan Railway]([https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Railway](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metropolitan_Railway)) — opened in London in 1863. Keep in mind these were coal-burning, steam-hauled trains that were being operated *underground*, and “the Met” was still a massive success. London was so congested that thousands of residents happily paid to ride the Metropolitan underground through the soot and steam and grime. Electrification wouldn’t occur until around 1900, when the Metropolitan began to experience competition for ridership from the new deep level tubes, which began service with electric traction from their opening. Long story short, extreme congestion and population density in London lead to the direct development of underground mass transit.
Reading Jennifer Worth’s trio of Midwife memoirs is a look into how these conditions persisted in the East End into the 1950s and ‘60s, up to when the docks closed.
They crammed everyone close together. For those homeless/sleeping rough:
Penny sit-up: You could rest sitting on a bench but could not lay down, or really sleep (sleeping wasn’t including in the price)
Twopenny hangover: you would sleep hanging over a rope for two pennies
Four-penny coffin: finally some rest laying down packed like sardines, infested with bugs though (so said Orwell)
https://www.historic-uk.com/CultureUK/Two-Penny-Hangover/
This is for Victorian age but it continued into the 20th century (and tbf, so did the Victorian age)
A lot of people packed into the East End, and around the Docks. Famillies often had the two parents and ten children living in a four room terraced house. The tallest tenements were about four floors, so were packed tight with people. Imagine the smell and noise. Everybody had coal fires, ships and train hooters all day and night. Knocker-uppers at dawn for work, lamp lighters and workmen singing and whistling wherever they went. Vitually everyone was packed into what is now the North and South Circular road areas. The streets were full of children playing, going too and from school, street vendors, horses, horses dung piled high everywhere, trams, etc. There are a few good films on Youtube that might help you visulage how life was a hundred and twenty years ago.
Latest Answers