Birthing

This post is the sixth in a series on life in 17th to 19th century Bohemia. Prior posts have discussed farms, houses and homes. Nothing, however, creates a home more than a child. This post will talk about the the birth process in Bohemia during the 17th to 19th centuries. Giving birth is a natural process, and in the west it has been institutionalized to hospitals, although today certain movements go back to the child birth process used by our ancestors--use of a midwife. The use of a doula is also trending in present time. Parturition, is of course, reserved only for the stronger of the two sexes, and varied cultural norms prescribe how the process occurs and the manner and methods followed. 

Partial of the heading in Netolice Book 31 Image 25,
 last column Hebamme (German) translated to English means Midwife

Parish records in Bohemia generally started to record the name of the midwife who assisted at the birth in about 1780. In Czechia, midwife licensing was required in 1867, or the year before the Josef and Anna Hawel family immigrated to the US.  This means of all the Hovel children born to Josef and Anna only the youngest, Wenzel (later known as Howard) may have been born to a licensed midwife.  Wenzel was born in September 1867 (this birth record is not set to be online until 2049). However, even though the formal midwife exam and the related follow up licensing became required in 1867, that does not mean there was lack of proper education for a midwife. The first educational courses were at Charles University in Prague, starting about 1753. Before 1760 the course was in Latin, and after 1760 Latin was replaced by German and later, in the mid-19th century, German was replaced by Czech. The parish records for my 2nd great grandfather Josef Hawel (b 1808) and his son, my great grandfather, Martin (b 1850) had the last column to insert the name of the midwife. 

Parish Record of my 2nd Great Grandfather, Josef Hawel
born 10 March 1808.  Midwife delivering baby was Agnete
Netolice Book 30, image 32

A midwife had to overcome, or deal with some superstitious beliefs, along with changing religious and cultural norms. However, if they had not partaken of the male-dominated teaching courses at the University, they would have spent at least one year in an apprenticeship under an experienced midwife.  At first all in the profession were females, but later males started to take up the profession. In addition, male doctors started to move into a profession that had been female dominated. This caused different sorts of consternation, particularly in Puritanical England. Generally, cultural norms would not allow a male into the birth room. Aunts, mothers, sisters, and perhaps older daughters, however, would be allowed along with the midwife.  The thing is, there was little to be done by all the woman in attendance. Although, I suppose they could provide support to the mother, and ask for more towels and hot water (after all every television show or movie with a home birth there always seems to be a need for more hot water and towels). Herbs and perhaps some oils were used at the time, but it was mainly the mother attempting to give a natural birth aided by the midwife. Hospitals provide a measure of safety if things start to go wrong, our ancestors did not have that luxury. 

English Cartoon of a male doctor with an odd fanciful
grin examining a pregnant woman. Notice the disapproving
facial expressions of the women to the left.
Source: see no. 5, below

The Catholic Church took the lead in getting the midwife to be recognized and be a public part of the community. Because of this, a midwife received some compensation by the village, but she would also have been compensated by the family.  This raised the status of the midwife.  Some argue that it raised the level of control, but quite frankly, in a small village of a few dozen houses, there would not have been any secrets. The main idea of a public role was the baptism of the child given the high infant mortality rate. Infant mortality in the 17th century, that is death of an infant within its first year, is said to have been as high as 25%.  The midwife was allowed to baptize a child in two main circumstances. First, if it was a horrible labor and the child looked as if it would not make the full birth.  In this case the child could be baptized with only part of the body exposed. The second option was after birth and the child was weak, severely handicapped, or malformed (conjoined twins as an example). If the child were to survive a day to two, the priest may perform another baptism, not that the first was not licit, but mainly in order to have the Godparents present, part of the ritual of baptism. Godparents were a major choice at this time due to the potential deaths of the parents. Godparents were often from the same or higher socio-economic status, perhaps a miller, blacksmith, or a higher level farmer. Obviously, you would want you child in hands that could be supportive economically, as well as emotionally and spiritually. Parents want the best for their child.

Midwife attending to Child
Source: see no. 2, below

Given the cultural parturition process parameters in the time era discussed, that means that my great great grandfather and earlier grandfathers were not likely to have been able to help pick up an order that he placed. (My wife once said to me, about 30 years ago, if I was going to put in the order I had to be there to pick it up.) Of course, my Dad was not in the delivery room of the hospital for any of the births of his prodigy. Instead they waited outside, or perhaps went to notify the selected Godparents to be ready.  In the small villages as the order (baby) was delivered someone would come out to give the, hopefully, good news, which would then spread through the village like a bad tweet does today. The birth would also be announced by the ringing of the church or chapel bells.  A few hours after birth, the father and Godparents would see to the child's baptism, provided it had not already been baptized by the midwife due to difficult circumstances. Often times the child would be named for the nearest feast day--my 2nd great grandfather was born on 10 March just over a week before St Joseph's Day (March 19) is celebrated.  In Ireland, perhaps he would have been named Patrick. My great grandfather Martin was born on 11 November, the feast day of St Martin. 

Soboslav, Bohemia Parish Record for part of March 1715
Of the 11 boys born on this record, 8 were given the name Joseph

Both the mother and infant could seem healthy right after the birth, but that did not mean they were beyond potential health issues that could present themselves. Generally, the mother had a month off, so to speak, to build up her strength. Add to the potential negative side effects, to the superstitions in early times about a bad person looking at a child and imparting their bad values to the child, and you inherently have some angst. With a look to Jewish tradition of purification, Christian sects often had a religious ceremony after the birth, perhaps up to a month later,  for the mother (and infant) as the mother reentered society. In the sixth century, Pope Gregory I (who served as Pope from 590 to 604) noted that no defilement to a woman would occur due to a childbirth (removing the idea of a need for purification), and that a mother should not be separated from the church. Hence, there should be no negative connotations to giving birth. The Catholic religious ceremony was more to mark the perils and labor of child birth and hence the reason why the church viewed it as imparting of a blessing. The "churching" ceremony generally occurred about a month after the child's birth. While no longer practiced in the Roman Catholic faith, it went out with Vatican II, it is still practiced in Anglican, some Lutheran sects, and in Orthodox faiths. 

1850 Parish Record of my Great Grandfather Martin Hawel (Hovel)
Two dates to left, indicate he was born on Nov 11 and baptized on Nov 12
The attending midwife (right column) was Maria Chobolve (sp?) of Chrastany
Netolice Book 31, image 25

This month of wait, generally known as the "lying-in" period, was common in Europe during the era discussed.  After a child was born and the mother would receive some well deserved rest. The father would have to take on the role of having to run the household, in addition to his other work, while the mother recuperated and nursed and cared for the infant. Clearly, the lying in period was not so difficult as to make the couple to avoid future marital relations. Now, the questions arise as to whether or not, during this lying in period, the kitchen was properly cleaned, the cupboards properly organized, and the laundry properly folded.  I lack any information as to discern an answer to these chores. With the nesting instinct inherent in a mother-to-be, I am sure the interior of the house was in tip-top shape before the birth.

Childbirth in this era, without hospitals, pain blockers and even our taken for granted more sterilized measures, posed significant risks to the mother and baby. My Dad was born in the same house, near Manly, IA, as his father, but his only sibling was born over 5 years later in a hospital in Los Angles. This may not show so much the difference with births over this short period of time as the rural-urban divide. With the end of the resting month, the mom would view the religious ceremony with high anticipation as it meant the rebirth of her life as a new mother, taking back over the role as manager of the household, and an ability to attend to her other children, and the new infant. For the mom, the end of the month provided the ability to get out and about and to once again socialize with friends and neighbors. The birth of a child was a welcome event then as it is often today, and the cultural practices put in place helped with the care of mother and child. The new infant would take its place in the family further making a house a home.  

Sources:

1. https://www.hsj.gr/medicine/midwives-in-early-modern-europe-14001800.php?aid=348

2. http://czechgenealogy.nase-koreny.cz/search?q=midwife

3.  http://czechgenealogy.nase-koreny.cz/2011/11/birth-and-baptism-in-czech-society.html#more

4.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Churching_of_women

5.  http://blog.wellcomelibrary.org/2012/12/man-midwife/

6. Trebon Archives (parish register images)