CHAPTER - 01

HISTORICAL AND EVOLUTIONARY PROCESS OF PRISONS

15

1.1 Prisons in the Days of Yore;

From the beginning of early civilized communit ies, wrong doers were

punished accordingly or kept imprisoned. History reveals the early

forms of prisons that evolved for many years, imposing heavy torment

and fear and repentance. The early dungeons with darkness and rusty

smel l , immense suffering gradually converted to the cells on the land.

Then these gloomy rooms were converted into spacious cells but the

priority was given to the punishment.

For about 6000 years since the first early communit ies, the 'mood and

temper of the public' has been one of callous indifference to the

treatment and sufferings of its criminals. It is a terrible reflection upon

succeeding civilizations that humane methods of dealing with criminals

were not attempted until the 18 t h and 19 t h centuries A.D. The complex

problems involved in the treatment and imprisonment of offenders are

still very far from being even fully understood, let alone solved.

According to the united nations social defence research institutes

publication (Prison architecture), 'prisons, as places of punishment,

were uncommon in the ancient world. They were used rather, as

places of detention for those awaiting trial and sentence, and for

debtors and political offenders. Not until the 18 t h and 19 t h centuries

A.D. did they become places for the punishment of criminals, al though

some counties, notably England used a form of prison for this purpose

somewhat earlier.'

In 17 t h century B.C. Greece prisons were merely large rooms or

underground chambers for the detention of prisoners awaiting trial or

16

punishment, but plato was to speak of prisons two centuries earlier in

De Legibus in which he anticipated the modern correctional system by

many hundreds of years

"Let there be three prisons in the city, one for the safe keeping of persons awaiting trial and sentence : another for the amendment of disorderly persons and vagrants, those guilty of misdemeanours, to be called a sophronesterion (house of correction), ... a third to be situated in the country away from the habitations of man, and to be used for the punishment of felons."

Jerusalem in the 6 t h century B.C. had 3 institutions.

Beth - ha - keli (house of detention)

Beth - ha - asourin (House of those in chains)

Beth - ha - mahphecheth (House of those with chained hands and

feet)

Many of the early prisons are believed to have been underground

cisterns with access through gratings, covering the top. According to

the book 'Prison architecture', it reveals the early form of a Roman

prison, Mametr in, prison. "It consists of an upper rectangular room, lit

by a hole in the roof, with a dome like dungeon, below. The prisoner

was confined to the upper room unless condemned to death, when he

would be thrown into the lower dungeon to starve or be strangled. Not

all historians, however agree with this version of the Mamert in Prison".

This denotes the brutality version of the early prison environments.

17

In m e d i e v a l p r i sons t h e usua l p l a c e s of d e t e n t i o n w e r e t h e cas t l e

k e e p s or d u n g e o n s . E u r o p e h a s m a n y s u c h cas t l e p r i s o n s a n d the i r

n u m b e r s i n c r e a s e d du r i ng t he 1 5 t h a n d 1 6 t h c e n t u r i e s . A l l o f t h e m

w e r e no to r i ous fo r t he ghas t l y ce l l s , d u n g e o n s a n d o u b l i e t t e s in w h i c h

t h o u s a n d s of p r i sone rs w e r e t o r t u red a n d k i l led or left to d i e in m ise ry .

T h e i r n a m e s ca r ry o n a u r a of ev i l . Bast i l le is f a m o u s fo r t h e to r tu r i ng

ce l l s . M a x i m u m secur i t y a n d bru ta l t r e a t m e n t s w e r e t he on ly e f f ec t i ve

m e a s u r e s k n o w n . If a m a n (or w o m a n , or e v e n a ch i ld ) w e r e no t

t h r o w n in to p r i son fo r s o m e rea l or i m a g i n a r y o f f e n c e he w a s

e x e c u t e d or w h i p p e d , b a n d e d a n d m a i m e d , put in t h e s t o c k s or p i l lo ry

(a c h e a p f o r m of p r i son ) or t o r t u red a n d k i l led in s o m e o the r b a r b a r o u s

w a y .

B r i dewe l l ins t i tu t ions b e g a n in E n g l a n d to p rov i de e m p l o y m e n t fo r

b e g g a r s a n d v a g r a n t s . C o r r e c t i o n a l t r e a t m e n t s w e r e m a d e h e r e in

p o o r c o n d i t i o n s . In 1 5 5 7 t he f i rst ins t i tu t ion w a s o p e n e d . T h e y

c o n s i s t e d of c o n g r e g a t e r o o m s a n d la rge o p e n d o r m i t o r i e s a n d w e r e in

w o r k h o u s e s or h o u s e s o f co r rec t i on ra ther t h a n p r i sons .

18

8B11VERSITY OF MORATUWA. SRI U t f i l

This concept has developed in the rasp house of Amsterdam. It was

provided with a central court yard and the prisoners can gather in that

whenever they released. In this institution there were nine rooms,

serving as both, bedrooms and workrooms, housing f rom 4 to 12

prisoners each. Most of the rooms were about 5.2 m x 3.2 m with a

larger one 8.5 m x 5.0 m x 2.4 m high. Each room had t imber or

cement floors, boadered walls and a 'secret' or toilet bucket. The

rooms were entered off the courtyard through heavy double doors;

windows also opening on to the court, were unglazed and protected by

iron grills. No provisions was made for heating the rooms in winter.

Then afterwards in 1650 the first cellular prison built in Rome. The

prison buildings in the 17 t h and 18 t h centuries were usually two or three

storey structures arranged in rather haphazard way to enclose one or

more courts. Condit ions in the French prisons were, if possible, worse

and stories of intense suffering show with what courage prisoners

withstood the terrible loneliness and despair engendered by years of

solitary conf inement in wet, rat infested cells and oubliettes. Hundreds

of other prisoners were herded together in overcrowded rooms and

suffered the mental anguish of seeing husbands, wives and children

taken from them to execution or torture. Then afterwards each

prisoner was poisoned in a singular cell.

19

76219

1.2. The Emergence of a New Era

T h e y e a r 1 7 7 8 m a r k s t he b e g i n n i n g of t he m o d e r n Eng l i sh p r i son

s y s t e m . F r o m th is o n w a r d s t he p r i son s y s t e m b e c a m e c o m p l e x e d .

Fo r t h e f i rst t i m e , s e g r e g a t i o n of m e n a n d w o m e n w e r e d o n e . T h i s

s y s t e m s t r e s s e d t he n e e d for m o r a l a n d re l ig ious i ns t ruc t i on . T h e

s e p a r a t i o n a n d c lass i f i ca t i on of p r i sone rs is b e l i e v e d e s s e n t i a l f o r

rehab i l i t a t i on a n d r e f o r m .

A s t h e nex t s t ep sel f e n c l o s e d p r i sons c a m e into b e i n g . T h e w h o l e

ins t i tu t ion is p l a n n e d to h a v e a cen t ra l a r e a . T h e b o o k "p r i son

20

architecture" reveals that there have been three main overlapping

epochs in the history of prisons in the western world. The first one

was one of 'revenge' and 'repression'; it lasted many centuries and

was characterized by private dungeons and personal spite. The

second was brought about by religion but society still demand

retribution. The third, and much more recent, offered 'restitution' and

'rehabil i tation', in an effort to protect society and reform the offenders;

with the socio-cultural changes after the world war II the prisons of

western countries became filled with youths. Then the 'rehabil i tation'

of prisoners aroused as a good concept. This brought more

humanitar ian approach reducing the cruel, sophist icated nature of the

prisons. This idea began to affect the spatial organization of modern

prisons bringing them institutional orientation.

Wi th the socio-cultural changes after the world war II the prisons of

western countries became filled with youths. Then the 'rehabil i tation'

of prisoners aroused as a good concept. This brought more

humanitar ian approach reducing the cruel, sophisticated nature of the

prisons. This idea began to affect the spacial organization of modern

prisons bringing them institutional orientation.The reformatory system

was transplanted to Europe under the name of Borstal training. These

developments within the penal system naturally greatly inf luenced

prison architecture. The reformatory and the Borstal were only

reluctantly called prisons, and a most laws made a distinction between

a 'real prison' and a reformatory or Borstal. They were deprived of

their liberty as a punishment for their deeds whether they were placed

in a prison, reformatory of Borstal. Even more confusion, however,

arose with regard to the prison concept with the coming of open

institutions. The first open prison was created in Switzerland.

However the second world war changed the minds of designers. The

21

n u m b e r o f p r i sone rs so h igh in m a n y coun t r i es t ha t it b e c a m e

n e c e s s a r y to o p e n m a k e s h i f t in m a n y coun t r i es tha t it b e c a m e

ins t i tu t ions a n d t he on ly o n e s tha t cou ld be h a d at sho r t no t i ce w e r e

o p e n ins t i tu t ions . T h e p r i son au tho r i t i es s o o n f o u n d t h e m m o r e

in te res t ing t h a n t he c l o s e d ins t i tu t ions . S t e p by s tep in te res t h a s c o m e

to c o n c e n t r a t e o n t r e a t m e n t p r o g r a m m e s fo r t h e rehab i l i t a t i on o f

o f f e n d e r s .

Fig . 04 Si lent ium of san Miche le , R o m e , 1704

1.3 The A n t e c e d e n t s Of The Modern Pr i son

It c a n b e a r g u e d tha t l itt le of d i rec t v a l u e is to be l e a r n e d by a c l ose

s t u d y o f t rad i t i ona l p r i son d e s i g n . T h e d e s i g n o f a p r i s o n , a s of a n y

o the r bu i l d i ng , s t e m s f r o m t h e p u r p o s e s for w h i c h it is bui l t , a n d s o

m u c h h a s c h a n g e d in bo th p e n a l p h i l o s o p h y a n d p e n a l p rac t i ce as to

inva l i da te t h e phys i ca l pa t te rn o f t h e past . A n d yet , in sp i te o f v a s t

soc ia l t r a n s f o r m a t i o n s , t h e r e a re m a n y ind i rec t l e s s o n s to be g a i n e d by

e x a m i n i n g t h e d e v e l o p m e n t of p r i son a r ch i t ec tu re in re la t i on t o t h e

p e n a l i deo logy of s u c c e s s i v e g e n e r a t i o n s . Let us f o rge t fo r t h e

V

2 2

moment that these historic buildings are still in use, painfully

circumscribing the efforts of today's penal reformers, and let us

examine in a little detail some of the monuments of past thinking about

prison design.

W e may soon dismiss the design of the early prisons. In the days

when there was no systematic policy of imprisonment for convicted

offenders and no systematic theory about the funct ion of

imprisonment, there was also no recognizable agreement on prison

design. A great variety of buildings quite unsuitable for habitation were

used; many were in the cellars under other public buildings,

presumably because this position was easy to secure against escapes

and because the space was little valued for other uses. Into such

prisons were placed all persons whom society wished to be rid of -

felons, debtors, petty offenders and somet imes the insane, with little

attempt to separate them by sex or age or by any other criterion,

except perhaps by the capacity to pay for preferential treatment. No

regard was paid to sanitary or moral welfare. There was no separat ion

whatsoever, and the herding of men and women together into

dayrooms made promiscuity in evitable.

The earliest corrective establ ishments, such as the bridewells in

England and the "rasp-houses" in the Netherlands, however notable in

the history of penal reform, contributed little to the development of

prison architecture, being either remodelled, older buildings or

orthodox institutional buildings, with minor modif ications. Indeed, little

fresh thinking on design appears to have taken place until the

beginning of the eighteenth century.

23

The prison was becoming a specialized institution. In the case of San

Michele, the intake was confined to del inquent and incorrigible youths

under the age of twenty. Treatment was selected according to the

type of case. Finally, the buildings themselves began to take on a

functional character. The block at San Michele is recognized as the

prototype of the cell block design incorporating external cell windows,

which is still being used in many places today.

In terms of designing prisons, penal reform was at this period linked

with the adoption of the cellular plan. Only thus could some discipline

and sobriety be installed into the undifferentiated rabble that filled the

prisons.

Physically, the plan adopted for the Maison de Force was a gigantic

cart-wheel, with one octagonal courtyard in the centre surrounded by

eight triangular courts, each of which was reserved for one group of

inmates. Along the sides of each courtyard there were arcaded

buildings for housing prisoners, consisting of workshops on the ground

floor and three rooms above. The proportion of separate cells varied

with each court according to its function; in the court for men criminals,

separate cells were the rule. In contrast with the plan at San Michele,

the cells were placed back to back, so that the only light into the cell

came through a lattice window in the door itself. Between the wall and

the courtyard was an open arcade, along which the prisoners paraded

on the way to dining-rooms, chapel and workshop. The gallery above

must have made the cells extremely dark.

24

r i or . t ( r < i - s Af o

Fig.05 Maison de force, Ghent, 1773

The ground floor and above that a great hall surrounded by three tiers

of cells, 120 cells in all. As this block was open on both sides, it was

possible as at San Michele, for the cells to have outside windows. In

fact each cell had one window 3 ft. by 2 ft. - quite large for the date -

in the outside wall and a smaller window facing the great hall. Here,

as at San Michele, there was an altar at one end of the great hall so

that a service could be conducted more or less within view of inmates

while they were in their cells.

Before passing on to the main stream of development, which after the

late eighteenth century was for a long t ime concentrated in Amer ica,

we may turn aside to look at one eccentric if ingenious prison design,

proposed by the eminent English social philosopher, Jeremy Bentham.

The plan was dominated by the idea that it would be efficient and

economical if all cells could be visible from a single vantage point.

Bentham's Panopticon ("observe everything") plan, which he evolved

was conceived as a great circular domed building with a warders '

25

viewpoint at the centre. Beyond the cells were exercise yards of

varying size to that the building could be contained in a square. The

whole was to be covered by a glass roof. Bentham had enormous

faith that he had hit upon a plan which would solve the whole problem

of imprisonment. "Morals reformed, health preserved, industry

invigorated, instruction diffused, public burdens l ightened, economy

seated, as it were.

Fig.06 Benthan's panopticon design, 1791

It seems obvious that this kind of plan is hopelessly inflexible, being

dominted by the desire to supervise all cells f rom one point.

Bentham's building was relatively small , but it is extraordinary that this

plan has found its advocates in many countries and has been fol lowed

in.

There came the most grandiose example of all t ime. This was the

Stateville Prison of the State of Illinois, United States of Amer ica, built

by prison labour at an immense cost between 1916 and 1925. The

plan called for eight vast blocks, each consisting of cells on four f loors,

facing inwards towards a raised observation tower, and each block

covered by a partly glazed domed roof on lattice girders.

26

Fig .07 Statevi l le P r i son , Illinois, 1919.

W e a re n o w f ree to re tu rn to t h e m o r e in te res t ing d e b a t e o n p r i son

d e s i g n a n d p e n a l po l i cy w h i c h r a g e d in t h e Un i ted S t a t e s fo r m a n y

y e a r s . T h e p r o t a g o n i s t s w e r e t he s u p p o r t e r s o f t h e s o - c a l l e d

P e n n s y l v a n i a s y s t e m a n d t he s u p p o r t e r s o f t he so -ca l l ed A u b u r n

s y s t e m .

T h e A u b u r n m e t h o d u s e s t h e ins ide-ce l l layout , w i th r o w s of ce l ls

p l a c e d back to back to f o r m a sp ine a l ong t he c e n t r e o f t h e bu i l d i ng ,

a n d a p p r o a c h e d by n a r r o w co r r i do rs ; a w i d e u n b r i d g e d g a p s e p a r a t e s

th is co r r i do r f r o m t he o u t s i d e wa l l . In th is p lan t h e on ly l ight a n d air to

r e a c h t h e cel l h a v e to p a s s t h r o u g h t h e heav i l y ba r red w i n d o w s o n t h e

e x t e r n a l wa l l s , a c r o s s t h e g a p a n d t h e co r r i do r a n d t h r o u g h t h e f ron t o f

t h e ce l l . For th is r e a s o n it is c lea r tha t t he f ron t o f e a c h cel l h a s to be

27

as unobstructed as possible, and this leads to the zoo-cage bars are a

characteristic of the Auburn-type plan. The individual Auburn cells

were extremely small , insufficient even for occupancy at night and

totally inadequate for occupancy during the day, a purpose for which

they had never been intended.

Fig.08 Eastern penitentiary at cherry hill, philadelpheha,1829

In plan, Cherry Hill consisted of seven wings radiating f rom a central

rotunda with an observatory tower. Four of the wings were one floor

high and the other three were two floors high. Each wing was planned

with central corridors giving access to cells. Beyond each cell was a

small exercise yard surrounded by a high wall . There were 400 cells in

all. Steps were taken to enforce solitary conf inement and prevent any

possibil ity of prisoners conversing with each other. In the first plans

t h e r e w a s no d o o r f r o m cor r idor to ce l l , bu t on ly a p e e p - h o l e a n d a

f e e d i n g d rawer . T h e p r i sone r w a s to l ive a n d w o r k in h is ce l l , w i t h o n e

h o u r in t he ind iv idua l e x e r c i s e y a r d , a n d a d j a c e n t p r i s o n e r s w e r e not to

be a l l o w e d to use the i r exe r c i se y a r d s at t he s a m e t i m e . G u a r d s in t h e

cen t ra l t o w e r w e r e to p r e v e n t a n y i n t e r c o m m u n i c a t i o n . T h e r e w e r e to

b e no c o n g r e g a t e act iv i t ies .

A f t e r t he m i d - n i n e t e e n t h cen tu ry , a n d i n d e e d unt i l ve ry recen t l y , l i tt le

f r esh t h o u g h t w e n t into p r i son d e s i g n . Not on ly w a s t h e r e a g rea t

s l o w i n g d o w n of t he ra te o f p r i son bu i ld ing - in E n g l a n d , fo r e x a m p l e ,

on ly o n e p r i son w a s bui l t in t h e e igh ty y e a r s b e f o r e 1 9 5 8 - bu t s u c h

p e n a l ins t i tu t ions as w e r e bui l t w e r e unt i l qu i te recen t l y d e s i g n e d o n

t h e pa t te rn of t he o ld t y p e s E v e n the a d o p t i o n of n e w p e n o l o g i c a l

i deas a i m e d at h a s t e n i n g rehab i l i t a t ion h a v e not b e e n m a t c h e d by t h e

p rov i s i on o f a su i tab le phys i ca l e n v i r o n m e n t , p rope r l y e q u i p p e d fo r t he

n e w p r o g r a m m e . T o d a y ' s p r i son sti l l i n co rpo ra te t he p h i l o s o p h i e s o f

y e s t e r d a y . It is c o m m o n l y he ld tha t t he phys i ca l r e f o r m o f p r i s o n s has

l a g g e d se r ious l y b e h i n d t he m o d e r n f o r m s of p e n a l t r e a t m e n t . In t h e

o p i n i o n of B a r n e s & T e e t e r s ,

"If it is to have any prospect of success in practice, an enlightened program for treating convicted delinquents must have an appropriate and fitting physical setting It is generally agreed by enlightened students of the problem that most of the rehabilitative programs worked out over the last two or three generations have failed to live up to the expectations of their sponsors. No single item has played a greater part in this failure than the fact that the physical setting of convict life has almost everywhere been in conflict with the ideals underlying the reform programs".

B a r n e s & T e e t e r s ,

The present issue of the International Review of Criminal Policy

reflects a widespread and rather sudden revival of interest in the

design of penal institutions. It comes at a t ime when the development

of penological thinking has rendered obsolete most of the old visual

concept ions of the prison. The solid qualities of a fortress designed to

hold a thousand or more inmates, surrounded by a symbolical ly

unscalable wall , are immediately felt to be almost entirely inappropriate

to modern ideas, even before analysis shows that they are also

inappropriate to modern pratices.

The next element which has always prohibited flexibility in prison

design is the necessity of building high surrounding walls. It is

therefore of direct importance if the anxieties that still provoke the

building of immense high walls can be relieved by modern technology

(such as the use of the television devices now being adopted) or by a

more realistic appraisal of the risks attached to escapes.

W e thus arrive at a "normal" long-stay institution, which is built on an

open site and can therefore use a free plan, instead of a tightly packed

arrangement such as is found in older prisons and is still fo l lowed in

modern prisons built along traditional lines. Wi th f reedom to

subdivide, there is scope for building units which are more or less self-

contained, making the essential provision for small , carefully selected

groupings of prisoners who will spend the greater part of their t ime

together as a unit.

There are a number of indications of rapid development towards more

appropriate design. This can be seen, for example, by compar ing the

plans of two new British prisons. Everthorpe Hall, completed in 1958,

is certainly less grim than its nineteenth century forerunners, but the

30

cell-blocks are essentially tradit ional, with their extravagant central well

extending from ground to vaulted roof and their rows of cells

approachable by balcony. Only the architectural design has been

adapted to modern tastes and the scale of the block has been

reduced. On the other hand, Blundeston, which is due for complet ion

at the end of 1962, shows a transformed approach to cell block

design: Here there are four virtually free-standing T-shaped blocks

encircling the administration and communal block. The design of the

individual cell blocks is even more encouraging. Here there is no

longer a light well , and the T-plan has also el iminated the long

corridors. Moreover, for the first t ime for centuries in a newly built

British secure prison, some of the accommodat ion is in the form of

dormitories, so arranged that each dormitory, together with its sanitary

accommodat ion, can be sealed off as required. Each block contains

three upper floors of sleeping accommodat ion, together providing

space for seventy-five inmates.

31

Fig.09 Ever thope hall p r ison,1958

T h i s a r r a n g e m e n t is s u c h a subs tan t i a l a d v a n c e o n E v e r t h o r p e Hal l

t ha t it m a y s e e m c a p t i o u s to cr i t ic ize it. It wi l l be a p p r e c i a t e d , h o w e v e r ,

t ha t t h e r e is sti l l s c o p e fo r f u r the r p r o g r e s s . A l t h o u g h t h e fo l ly o f t h e

h igh wa l l h a s b e e n re jec ted at B l u n d e s t o n , t he c o m p a c t l ayou t

i nd i ca tes an ins t i tu t iona l ra ther t h a n a d o m e s t i c sca le .

32

Fig.10 Blundeston prison,

The communal rooms, moreover, are grouped on the ground floor of

the cell blocks and in the central blocks, so that, even though there are

four separate dining rooms, the individual cell-block f loors have no

meal or day space. Class-rooms for the whole prison are grouped,

and the workshops provided are large sheds set aside f rom the

buildings, as can be seen from the model referred to above.

Attent ion can also be paid to the surfacing and embel l ishment of the

buildings. With quite a small outlay on furniture and furnishings, a

bare, barn-like atmosphere can be transformed. Most people would

agree that it would be better to employ this labour in splashing fresh

paint onto plain walls rather than in the endless polishing of

unrewarding surfaces. The new approach, still only imperfectly

formulated, implies rejection of the old faith in solitary repentance and

substitutes the idea of integration in a socially approved group.

In terms of prison design, the implication of this new direction of penal

thought is that the unit on which design should be based is no longer

33

the individual prisoner in his solitary cell, but rather the small group of

perhaps twelve prisoners under the tutelage of one group officer. The

physical provision for this group is likely to consist partly of dormitories

and partly of cells, with a simple common room and full sanitary

accommodat ion. All measures would be aimed at increasing rather

than restricting group activities. The group officer would be

omnipresent, but ideally he would be there as a counsellor and friend

and not as an ascribed leader.

It may be felt that the impression of informality conveyed by scattered

one-storey buildings may assist the task of rehabil itation, but it may

also be that this style is an aesthetic reaction against the fortress

architecture of traditional prisons. Examples given in the previous

section indicate some of the ways in which progressive thought is

moving. Whatever the precise layout adopted, it is to be expected that

the typical buildings will be smaller and less substantial than those to

which we are accustomed.

During the nineteenth century, erected massive buildings symbol izes

the majesty of the law. It seems right, therefore, to regard the present

period as one for experimentat ion, in which a bold variety of designs

and conceptions will be tried out, and their successes and failures

painstakingly observed. It is only in this way that the new prisons can

make their full contribution to the struggle against cr ime.

In spite of its high moral principles, the Pennsylvania system was

almost unbearably onerous from the start.

34

Charles Dickens, felt that the psychological and sociological

assumpt ions behind the solitary regime were fal lacious and that

sol i tude was more likely to lead to insanity than to penitence or

reformation.

35