History of Penitentiaries: Punishment, Prisons & Labor
This paper reviews the history of punishment and prison development from antiquity to the modern era, with a focus on the American penitentiary system. It compares the early nineteenth-century Pennsylvania system—developed by the Quakers and centered on solitary confinement—with the Auburn system, which added enforced silence and communal work. The paper also traces the evolution of prison labor, from convict leasing to chain gangs used on public works projects, and considers the role of inmate employment in reducing recidivism and prison violence. Key sources include historical and penological literature spanning ancient legal codes to contemporary corrections policy.
- Introduction: Scope and purpose of the paper
- History of Punishment: Ancient origins and legal definitions of punishment
- History of Prison Development: Early prisons from antiquity to modern penology
- Comparing the Pennsylvania and Auburn Systems: Two early American prison models contrasted
- Impact of Prison Labor Over Time: Chain gangs, convict leasing, and modern labor programs
- Conclusion: Summary of key findings across all sections
✍️ How to write this paper — guide, tools & examples ▾
What makes this paper effective
- It establishes a clear organizational roadmap in the introduction, signposting each section the reader will encounter, which aids coherence and comprehension.
- It grounds historical claims in authoritative sources—such as Black's Law Dictionary and Morris & Rothman's Oxford History of the Prison—lending scholarly credibility to its survey.
- The comparative structure of the Pennsylvania vs. Auburn section highlights meaningful distinctions efficiently, using direct quotations to anchor the comparison in primary definitions.
Key academic technique demonstrated
This paper demonstrates effective use of the literature review format: synthesizing multiple secondary sources across a chronological and thematic framework rather than analyzing a single text. Each section draws on relevant citations to support discrete historical claims, modeling how to use sources as evidence for a broader narrative argument.
Structure breakdown
The paper opens with a framing introduction that states its scope and organization. It then moves through four substantive sections in logical sequence: the definition and history of punishment, the origins of prison buildings, a side-by-side comparison of two early American prison systems, and the development of prison labor. A conclusion summarizes the key findings from each section, mirroring the introduction's roadmap.
Introduction
With nearly 10% of its population incarcerated, it is important for Americans to understand the purpose and history of penitentiaries in this country. To this end, this paper reviews the relevant literature to provide a history of punishment, the history of prison development, and a comparison of the Pennsylvania system and the Auburn system. Finally, an analysis of the impact and involvement of prison labor over time is followed by a summary of the research and important findings in the conclusion.
History of Punishment
Although humans have used various punishments for different purposes—such as infractions of social, religious, or legal codes like the Code of Hammurabi—for millennia (Voglis, 2002), the term has assumed a formalized modern meaning that includes a legal process. According to the definition provided by Black's Law Dictionary (1990), punishment is "any fine, penalty, or confinement inflicted upon a person by the authority of the law and the judgment and sentence by a court, for some crime or offense committed by him, or for the omission of duty enjoined by law" (p. 1234). While crimes of omission are rare (i.e., failure to pay taxes), the punishments for either case may include incarceration as discussed below.
History of Prison Development
Like punishment, buildings specifically designed for involuntary physical confinement also date to antiquity (Morris & Rothman, 1999). Although the buildings that can be regarded today as prisons have ancient origins, the historical sources for these early prisons have been lost or remain fragmented, and they can only be explained today in terms of modern penology (Morris & Rothman, 1999). Nevertheless, it is clear that humans have recognized the need to separate certain types of criminal offenders from the general population for thousands of years. Morris and Rothman report that "in the Western tradition the practice occurs as early as the Greek myths and the Book of Genesis, and it is usually classified as part of the wider category of physical punishments that restrict an individual's freedom of movement" (p. 3).
Comparing the Pennsylvania and Auburn Systems
In the early nineteenth century, the Quakers were responsible for developing the Pennsylvania system for penitentiaries, while the Auburn system that followed a few years later incorporated innovations intended to improve the field of corrections (May, 1995). The Pennsylvania system was predicated on the notion that prisoners must be kept separate from each other. According to Williams (1996), "The Pennsylvania system of prison discipline is based on the idea that convicts should be separated from one another by confining only one inmate in a cell" (p. 188). By contrast, the Auburn system used solitary confinement as well as enforced silence among prisoners (Williams, 1996). In both cases, prisoners were expected to perform meaningful work to help support their prisons (Williams, 1996), and the impact and involvement of prison labor since then are discussed below.
Conclusion
The research showed that the history of punishment and prison development dates to antiquity, but the historical record is either silent or fragmented concerning specific purposes beyond confinement. The research also showed that both the Pennsylvania system and the Auburn system used solitary confinement and prison labor, with the Auburn system additionally incorporating enforced silence as part of its corrective regimen. Finally, the research showed that by the turn of the twentieth century, the use of convict leasing and the unfair competitive advantage it created resulted in a shift to prison labor being used for public works projects.
Create your account
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.