Unique histories from the 18th and 19th centuries-Baths for Medicinal Purposes:

Unique histories from the 18th and 19th centuries-Baths for Medicinal Purposes:

Public baths were established in England during the Roman supremacy, but they eventually fell to ruins. It was not until the spread of leprosy occurred during the Norman Conquest that bathing came back into style. That lasted for a few hundred years until the sixteenth century when people switched from linen to woolen clothing, and it became more important to look clean than be clean. People would change a smelly, dirty shirt rather than bathe because physicians claimed miasma—unhealthy smells or odors—caused disease and bathing encouraged “bad air” to enter a person’s pores. However, by the end of the eighteenth century, opinions on bathing shifted once again.

Water-Water-M-1107

People knew bathing was good for hygienic and health reasons by the early 1800s, and many of the old public baths were restored. However, because there was not enough plumbing for household consumption, baths in private homes was still not possible. It would not be until the mid 1800s that people began to have bathrooms in their homes, and, even then, they were a luxury. By the late 1800s, after much investigation, public water systems began were built in response to diseases, such as cholera, and that allowed bathrooms to be installed inside homes.

In line with this new belief in bathing was the 1850 compilation of remedies and cures, edited by Thomas Harrison Yeoman, M.D., and titled The People’s Medical Journal and Family Physician. Yeoman, devoted a section in this medical book to the benefits of bathing because it “preserves health…lights and invigorates the body.” John Bell, M.D., was more impressed by bathing than Yeoman. He wrote an entire book about it in 1859 titled, Water, as a Preservative of Health, and a Remedy in Disease: A Treatise on Baths. Bell claimed the reason for his book was “to be more in harmony with [the] physiological phenomena, and with the curative effects of the different kinds of baths; and to furnish a safe guide for the use of these agents, in the preservation of health and the cure of disease.”

Yeoman claimed there were four types of baths: cold, tepid, warm, and hot. Bell stated there were six:

  • Cold bath 33° to 63° Fahrenheit
  • Cool bath 60° to 70° Fahrenheit
  • Temperate bath 75° to 85° Fahrenheit
  • Tepid Bath 85° to 92° Fahrenheit
  • Warm Bath 92° to 98° Fahrenheit
  • Hot Bath 98° to 112° Fahrenheit

Yeoman believed cold baths invigorated and harden a constitution. Bell agreed but went a bit further, stating, “We find that the sanguine and robust … are they who can use it with the most comfort and advantage … But the thin, delicate, and feeble infant, whose temperature is already too low, and whose functions react imperfectly under any depressing agency, will be permanently and prejudicially affected by cold immersion.” Bell stated that beside hygienic reasons for cold baths, they helped “various febrile diseases,” inflammation of the joints, injuries from sprains and fractures, “fevers, inflammations, hemorrhages, convulsive affections … and irritative disorders.” In fact, Bell even claimed two patients — three and five years old with scarlet fever — were cured by taking a cold bath and many other physicians experienced the same miraculous cure with cold baths and scarlet fever.

Sanitary Bathing, Author's Collection
Sanitary Bathing, Author’s Collection

Cool, temperate, and tepid baths were sometimes used in different combinations or in combinations with cold, warm, or hot baths. In general, however, these baths was often used as preparatory baths for a cold or hot one. Of these three baths, the tepid bath, seemed to have the most ability to help with illness. For the most part, according to Bell, tepid baths were “found generally most congenial to children and delicate females, and to all of both sexes who are constitutionally feeble.” It was suggested they be used when a person was worn down and for all “forms of fever and nervous excitement” in which cold bathing was allowed. Supposedly, febrile diseases benefited the most from tepid baths, with patients suffering from typhoid fever particularly benefiting.

Warm bathing was considered to be more than medicinal and has been practiced since the time of Homer. Homer described warm bathing “as a means of refreshing the wearied traveler, and of preparing him for the repast and the enjoyment of other rites of hospitality.” Both Bell and Yeoman claimed warm baths were rejuvenating and slowed the aging process, because the practice relaxed and softened “the rigid and indurated fibres of the old person.” Even Charles Darwin agreed stating, “to those who are past the meridian of life, and have dry skin, and begin to be emaciated, the warm bath, for half an hour twice a-week, I believe to be eminently serviceable in retarding the advances of age.” Benjamin Franklin also recommended warm baths be taken twice a week to retard aging and he practiced this until he died.

Yeoman found that hot baths helped those who had a “retention of urine [as hot baths] … afford great relief, and will frequently excite the bladder to expel its contents.” Bell claimed hot baths were beneficial but “required the lymphatic constitution of Napoleon … [as they were] decidedly stimulating … [because they] strongly excite the circulation, and prove to be both a nervous and vascular irritant.” Hot baths offered benefits to people with “spasm of the stomach, and tumefactions … also edema of the inferior extremities,” and they also helped with croup, cholera infantum, gout, or rheumatism. However, they were not suggested for “rickety children.”

Soap Advertisement, Courtesy of Wikipedia
Soap Advertisement, Courtesy of Wikipedia

By the late 1800s, bathing was beginning to be viewed more as a sanitary practice than medically beneficial. A two-volume compilation for women was published in 1896 titled The House and Home. It covered everything from occupations to hat making to personal hygiene. In it J. West Roosevelt, M.D., published an article titled “Hygiene in the Home,” and mentioned bathing.

Clean clothes do not make a clean skin, although dirty inner garments do make a clean body impossible … [Cold bathing] I think … is a most excellent habit for persons who are strong enough to bear it; but it should be regarded as a stimulating luxury more than as a method of cleansing the body … But to succeed in getting really clean, soap is absolutely, and hot water almost, indispensable … The rule for determining whether cold or warm baths are best suited to any particular individual is very simple: If a bath either hot or cold, is followed by a sense of comfort, that bath is beneficial.

by Geri Walton

 

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s