England’s Ancient Housing Solution

Recently published in FBHI | The Faith-Based Housing Initiative, Case Studies: England’s Ancient Housing Solution; Why 16th-century English almshouses provide a model for faith-based housing

written by Eli Smith for FBHI, Dec 10, 2024

At first glance, the almshouses of 16th-century England might seem worlds apart from today’s faith-based housing efforts. After all, England 500 years ago was a very different place than the United States today. There’s little doubt it was not a fun time to be alive, especially for the poor. The population was booming, leading to a lack of housing, food, and employment. The political and religious uncertainty that was born from the English Reformation meant that aid to those in need was constantly in flux. When the Crown confiscated all Catholic lands, it also shut the doors of at least half of the hospitals and almshouses in the country.1 In response, private donors across England stepped up, creating new almshouses to fill the gap.

These humble establishments- designed to provide permanent residences for the elderly poor- can be useful case studies for the faith-based housing of today. Often built near the parish church and with varying degrees of religious association, these almshouses offer what is likely the best historical parallel to faith-based housing conversations today. Those conversations would be wise to include the lessons of 16th century almshouses; their incredible adaptability, relationship to public welfare, and longevity allowed for rapid growth and an impact that has lasted centuries. These ancient almshouses can and should serve as a blueprint for how faith-based housing can establish itself in an American context.

Flexability

One of the defining features of 16th-century almshouses was their remarkable adaptability. Each was uniquely tailored to meet the needs of its community and the resources of its founder. Some were grand, with extravagant central quadrangles and gates that prominently displayed the founder’s name, while others were simple row houses with little fanfare. It was not uncommon for founders to even donate their own house to be carved up into apartments. Most housed only a small number of residents- often six or fewer- though some larger institutions provided for dozens.2 Almshouses primarily served the elderly poor who could no longer work, but many also admitted individuals with disabilities or other vulnerabilities. Some almshouses were gender or occupation specific, but most were open to deserving applicants from all different walks of life.

No two almshouses were the same. They were all suited to fit their context, whether that be the smallest town or the biggest city. The incredible flexibility led to experimentation and adaptation that allowed them to spread like wildfire across England. The simplicity of most allowed them to be established quickly and relatively inexpensively, and within fifty years there were a variety of almshouses with varying governance structures and designs.

This flexibility is an inspiration for faith-based housing today. Just as 16th-century England required a diversity of approaches, the United States needs an adaptable model that can fit the needs of a vast and diverse nation. Experimentation and adaptation is as necessary today as it was 500 years ago. Just look at what happened in England; in 1601, they codified new laws that standardized and regulated almshouses, building on the successes of their experimentation and allowing almshouses to continue to be established.

Local Impact

Another key lesson is the role in what scholars call the “mixed economy of welfare.” Those fancy words essentially refer to the coexistence of public and private systems of welfare – something that may seem common today, but was a recent innovation 500 years ago.3 You might expect that this relationship would lead to a reduction in charitable giving, but instead support shifted to direct local relief that a donor could see the impact of. Donors were motivated to act because they could see the tangible impact of their contributions within their own communities.

Implicit in this relationship is that no one person or organization could single handedly solve all issues of poverty in one community, much less the nation as a whole. As a result, donors could give more flexibly within their means, opting to build something small rather than nothing at all. Faith-based organizations should look at this example and realize, much as 16th century patrons did, that they alone cannot completely solve systemic problems. They can only do the most that they are capable of, focusing on what is feasible rather than aiming for overly ambitious projects. A small development of 10 homes might not solve the entire housing crisis, but it can still improve the lives both residents and neighbors.

Almshouse founders recognized their limited ability and embraced it, doing what they could even if it made a smaller impact.

Longevity

What these almshouses lacked in size was made up for in the longevity of their impact. An almshouse that was built to last not just changed the lives of the half dozen or so immediate recipients, but would house dozens or hundreds of people over centuries. An almshouse with 6 places would provide for roughly 240 residents over a 400 year life span, and many more if it were admitting couples or allowing roommates. This may not seem like a lot, but in a small town or a city with many almshouses the impact could be huge. Furthermore, even the most modest almshouses were often located in the center of town or close to the parish church, intertwining them with the very fabric of the town and becoming an important part of the place. This was even more true for those that were architecturally grand or beautiful, providing courtyards and gardens for both residents and locals alike.

Many almshouses from the 16th century or earlier still survive to this day. New establishments were created steadily until the early 20th century, and altogether there are around 2600 almshouses across England today. They have proven to be not just a lasting model for charitable housing but also essential pieces of English towns.

Living in one is a privilege that connects residents with hundreds of years of history, making for a home whose roots run deep.

Faith-based housing offers an opportunity to bring this kind of longevity to the United States. Not all of it will be long lasting and beautiful (almshouses didn’t all survive), but those that succeed can create places that will be looked after and loved well into the future. Faith-based institutions are uniquely positioned to take the long view, creating truly great places that will last for generations.

Conclusion

The story of 16th-century English almshouses is more than a historical curiosity- it is a model for modern faith-based housing. The adaptability that allowed almshouses to be created in many different contexts is needed today if faith-based housing is to become widespread. Furthermore, almshouses show that faith-based institutions don’t always need to strive for the biggest project; sometimes the small projects are the ones that stick around and become integral parts of the community. Those looking to build faith-based housing should consider if an almshouse-like development is more suited to them than a large apartment building might be.

Small, intentional projects can both fill critical gaps and create lasting beauty. Just as almshouses continue to serve their communities centuries later, faith-based housing projects can provide hope, stability, and dignity for generations to come.

---