A Brief Overview of Childbirth and Nursing in Seventeenth Century America
Women in the seventeenth century
were not graced with the medical advancements or knowledge that women have
today, and this prompted a higher risk associated with both pregnancy and
childbirth. However, they did have a
supportive female community that proved beneficial in providing knowledge and
support to new and expecting mothers.
While men dominated most aspects of life in the seventeenth century,
pregnancy, childbirth, and nursing were female niches.
In several communities, men were
excluded from the delicate handling of childbirth, barred from the home or into
another room. The husband was at the
mercy of women present during labor; these women served as middlemen to keep
him informed. In excluding men from
childbirth, doctors and pastors were rarely present. It was only “In a moment of extreme peril the
traditional experience of the midwife gave way to the book-learning and
professional aura of the minister-physician.”[1] This changed by the mid-eighteenth century,
as people recognized that medical and religious authorities could prove to be
the most help in dire situations.
Instead of taking instruction from
minster-physicians in the community, pregnant women put faith in older
mothers. There were not many midwives in
New England during the seventeenth century, and female neighbors took on the
role. The experienced women would
provide information and comfort to expecting mothers, as well as old wives’
tales. For example, they warned the
mother that “reaching over one’s head during the last months of pregnancy would
result in a tangled umbilical cord and the possible death of child.”[2] They would also use eggs (a symbol of
fertility) to help speed delivery. The English Housewife recommended taking
“two or three eggs and they must be neither roast nor raw, {…} and eat a piece
of brown bread to them and drink a draught of small ale.”[3] When it came time to deliver the child,
several women would gather in the home, and help deliver the child. For example, “Depositions in an Essex County
case of 1657 reported a dozen women present at a Gloucester birth.”[4] There is also an instance where every female
member in Falmouth Neck attended the birth of one woman’s son.[5]
The female community was present
after childbirth as well. In fact,
another lactating mother would often feed the baby for the first time; this was
because the mother’s milk was considered “impure for several days owing to the
‘commotions’ of birth.”[6] However, it is important to note that there
was no paid wet-nurse. All wet-nursing
was voluntary, either by family members or neighbors. While it was the responsibility of the mother
to nurse, when a mother was sick or had to travel, it proved incredibly helpful
to have the support of the surrounding female community. As Beales puts it, “Exchange or courtesy
wet-nursing was thus an extension of the networks of female friendship and
service which existed at the time of childbirth.”[7]
While a wet-nurse could be used
when the mother was sick or traveling, these situations were also used to
promote the weaning of a child. Ulrich
also describes cases where mothers would leave their children and stay with extended
family in an effort to get the child to stop nursing; this was known as a
“weaning journey.”[8]. These weaning journeys have led historians to
conclude that the weaning process was an anxious experience for both mother and
child, but the lack of documentation cannot confirm this belief.
Good Neighbors by Johannes Christiaan Janson, 1780 – 1810 |
.
|
Childbirth was a daunting
experience for women in the seventeenth century, and the support provided from
the female community proved invaluable.
In a period when women lacked a voice, they demonstrated their knowledge
and strength through the exclusive niche of childbirth.
Works
Cited
Beales
Jr., Ross W. “Nursing and Weaning in Eighteenth-Century New England Household”
in Families and Children, edited by
Peter Benes, 48-63. Boston: Boston University, 1987.
Markham,
Gervase. The English Housewife. Edited
by Michael R. Best. Montreal:
McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1986.
Ulrich,
Laurel Thatcher. Good Wives: Images of
Reality in the Lives of Women in Northern New England 1650-1750. New York:
Oxford University Press, 1980.
[1]Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, Good Wives: Images of Reality in the Lives
of Women in Northern New England 1650-1750 (New York: Oxford University
Press, 1980), 133.
[2] Ibid., 137.
[3] Gervase Markham, The English Housewife, ed. Michael R.
Best., {Montreal: McGill-Queen’s University Press, 1986), 40.
[4] Laurel Thatcher Ulrich, Good Wives, 126.
[5] Ibid., 126.
[6] Ibid., 129.
[7] Ross W. Beales Jr.,
“Nursing and Weaning in Eighteenth-Century New England Household” in Families and Children, ed. Peter Benes (Boston:
Boston University, 1987), 60.
[8] Ibid., 58.
Excellent article! Paintings provide a wealth of insight into material culture as well. Well done, Miss!
ReplyDelete