This Pub is a commentary on menstruation in early modern Europe, including the misconceptions around menstruating, as well as how those understandings were used by men to control and by women to resist.
Menstruating in the early modern period was a thing of taboo and confusion. Europeans attempted to grasp its cause, purpose, and effects, yet were constricted by their limited understanding of sex and the human body. The nuanced understandings and social implications of menstruation make it difficult to summarize simplistically. Despite this, the influence of patriarchy and current social structures turned menstruation into a device of authority. Menstruation in the early modern period had complex meanings and was thus utilized by both men and women as tools of control.
In early modern Europe, meanings around menstruation vary with culture, and menstrual blood itself has compounded interpretations. Menstrual blood was “symbolic of both creation and corruption, nurture and venom”, and was thus applied to individuals based not only on their social status but the events of the world around them.1 Superficially, menstruation was taboo, and menstrual sex—sex while a person was menstruating—was forbidden due to its seeming toxicity. Menstruating women were often barred from places, people, or activities, as bleeding changed the way women were viewed.2 Not only was a currently menstruating person seen as dangerous, but it marked the transition into womanhood, meaning a girl was marriable.3 The health of women was seen as closely tied to the womb, thus menstruation could give hints about that person’s future offspring. Language to describe menstruation was vast due to its dark undertone, yet it was understood to serve two main purposes: purification and removal of excess blood.4
Due to the taboo nature of women’s sexual health, menstruation was often called the terms, the flowers, the courses, the months, and several other denominations.5 The official or scientific name was understood to come from the Latin word menstrua, which was taken to signify two things. First, the word menstrua is similar to another Latin word, monstrua, which made sense to many early modern Europeans, as menstruation was often viewed as evil and monstrous. Secondly, the definition of the Latin word menstrua was understood to relate to the monthly occurrence of the menstrual cycle. The term “flowers” is applied to the occurrence due to “the fruit”, or offspring, that results from menstruating.6
Menstruation was analyzed through the lens of what one might call the one-sex model, where men and women were essentially the same sex, but women were underdeveloped due to the lack of heat in their bodies.7 Through this view, it was concluded that men were able to expel excess fluids in the body due to their internal temperature, yet with their inherent defects, women must menstruate to maintain their health.8 There existed then two believed menstrual disorders, “cessation of menstruation (amenorrhea)” and “immoderate menstruation (menorrhagia)”.9 The prescribed treatment of said disorders differed following what each physician’s believed the purpose of menstruation to be. It could be suggested that women steep wool in certain mixtures or fill silk or fine linen bags with specific herbs, and place these materials near their vaginas. Many physicians argued against inserting an object into the vagina. In contrast, others believed it was acceptable for married women to do so, so long as they attached a string to the end of the object for removal.10
The assumed necessity of menstruating to cleanse the body meant that post-menopausal women were especially unhealthy and susceptible to disease.11 If women ceased menstruating, there were two main courses of action to treat the supposed disorder. Firstly, several people believed that bloodletting—meaning the intentional removal of blood from the body—was the correct treatment for someone who was not menstruating.12 Others disliked this idea and instead felt that women should be prescribed certain remedies that would bring on menstruation. Likely unaware, physicians often prescribed abortives as they could bring on bleeding from the vagina.13
It is important to note the difference between who was menstruating, and who was treating it. Most of those who worked with menstruating people were illiterate women, such as midwives. Further, midwives were not afforded sufficient funds or access to research menstruation. Due to this, the surviving physical evidence about menstruation comes from men who did not menstruate, such as “lawyers, clerics, grammar school teachers, ‘gentlemen’ and a few practicing doctors”.14 Additionally, the women who were able to visit such men for advice were those who could afford it. This means that much of the research about menstruation that exists in writing was based solely on elite women, ignoring the vast population of lower class women who dealt with similar issues.15 The lack of information—credible or not—from a wide sample size caused even further discrepancies in the understanding of menstruation.
This section is used as material to strengthen the argument in this paper. It is important to note that this book was created by a man, showcasing the differences in literacy and access afforded to people that treated and researched women’s health.
Culpeper, Nicholas, 1616-1654. Culpeper's Directory for Midwives, (London: 1676), 75.
While misinformation and different opinions were ever present, certain meanings applied to menstruation were used as a tool to hinder or control women. Menstruating women were often forced to isolate themselves, and when menstrual blood was seen as a pollutant to the body, sex with a menstruating person was prohibited.16 Intercourse including someone menstruating was said to cause diseases, and conception during menstruation was evil, thus leading to a monstrous child.17 On the other hand, menstrual blood had positive connotations like fertility and the ability to cure certain diseases.18 Menstrual blood was said to nourish a fetus in the womb, and eventually turn into breast milk after giving birth to a child.19 It is important to note that despite the stark contrast between the notions of menstrual blood, both could be utilized in varying scenarios as a way to control women. It is essential, then, to study the ideologies surrounding menstruation to fully understand women’s positions in early modern society.20
Religion was likely the main proponent of influence over the ideas on menstruation in the early modern period and the bible was employed as the main source to interpret and explain female inferiority.21 It is important to pay attention to the recurrence of taboo in the understanding of menstruation as it points to women’s ambiguous position in society. Despite their inferiority, they posed a threat by menstruating, which was a powerful and dangerous thing. The significance of the prohibition of sexual contact should not go unnoticed here, as this constraint was the most common of those associated with menstruation. It was expected that sexual encounters only happen between husband and wife in the home. The home can be viewed as one of the most crucial settings for upholding patriarchy and its associated behaviors. The household was also often an environment where patriarchal behaviors were subverted and muddled. By restricting sex during times of menstruation, the implied inferiority of women and the superiority of men could be reinforced in the home.22
The ties between menstruation and childbirth were yet another way that women could be inhibited. Menstruation was a sure sign of a woman’s ability to procreate along with the understood completion of puberty. It was believed to be the mother’s duty to educate her daughter on how to handle menstruation, and it was the menstruating person’s responsibility to maintain their procreative health. It was said that catching a cold or eating the wrong foods could make a woman infertile and that women—especially young girls—should stay active while menstruating. Women were instructed that nothing should be used to obstruct the flow of the period and that while menstruating women should avoid experiencing certain emotions like fear, anger, or grief.23 After giving birth women were expected to purge blood for certain amounts of time depending on the sex of the infant, thirty days for a boy and forty days for a girl. It was also important that women avoid breastfeeding during this time because the breast milk could turn bad while menstruating.24
This image includes a list of contents that displays how women were controlled through their procreative and menstrual abilities.
Sharp, Jane, The Midwives Book, (London: 1671), 288.
It is evident that menstruation was an avenue to place strict restrictions on women, and further, to legitimize and naturalize women’s inferior status in society. Relating these regulations to the understanding of sex in the early modern period makes this point clear. In early modern Europe, the widely held belief about sex was that women and men were essentially the same sex. The difference came from a supposed lack of heat in women that were present in men.25 Not only did this heat allow men’s reproductive organs to exist outside of their bodies, but they were believed to be able to release excess fluids that must be purged from the body. Women, on the other hand, had reproductive organs inside their bodies and were unable to burn off extraneous fluids, and thus must undergo a monthly purge called menstruation.26 While physicians noted the placement of women’s organs to be a birth defect, this view was combined with the religious view that beings were created out of necessity. Therefore, the inherent deformity of women’s bodies was necessary for procreation and producing offspring.27 This understanding, coupled with the countless restrictions placed on menstruating women, was a constant reminder of the social order that placed women below men.
It should not be assumed that women internalized these prescriptions without question. As seen throughout much of early modern history, women worked around prescriptions given to them and remained beings of agency despite intense pressure to conform. As stated previously, when a woman ceased menstruating, she was seen as susceptible to several infirmities. While some physicians used bloodletting from other parts of the body as treatment, others used herbs that would bring on bleeding from the uterus.28 Several of the herbs that were proven to succeed in causing the uterus to shed were abortives. It is unclear whether physicians were aware of this fact, but it can be deduced that women would ask physicians to help resume their menstrual cycles as a guise to terminate a pregnancy. Women redirected their menstrual health away from male physicians in other ways, like spreading knowledge with each other or asking advice from midwives or other women in their communities. Women were also not quick to embody societal notions about pregnancy and menstruation, and instead, their opinions on menstruation largely depended on their attitudes about pregnancy.29
It is important to analyze both how menstruation was used by and against women in early modern Europe. Despite societal attempts to use menstruation as a tool to control, women utilized menstruation for their personal needs and desires just as much. The convoluted implications of menstruation in the early modern period served both as tools of agency for women and domination for men. Early modern Europeans had misinformed notions about sex and the differences in bodily structures between men and women. Due to these errors, there were several misconceptions about the purpose of menstruation, as well as the effects it had while occurring. Early modern people were unaware of their medical oversights and thus found many conclusions about why women menstruate and what happens when they do. These understandings were used to form regulations over women’s bodies and subsequently became a weapon for patriarchal domination. Nevertheless, women made their own conclusions about menstruation and pregnancy, and when able, enacted agency as a means to regain control of their bodies.
Crawford, Patricia. “ATTITUDES TO MENSTRUATION IN SEVENTEENTH-CENTURY ENGLAND.” Past and Present 91, no. 1 (1981): 47–73.
Culpeper, Nicholas, 1616-1654. Culpeper's Directory for Midwives: Or, A Guide for Women the Second Part. Discovering, 1. the Diseases in the Privities of Women. 2. the Diseases of the Privy Part. 3. the Diseases of the Womb. 4. the Symptomes of the Womb. 5. the Symptomes in the Terms. 6. the Symptomes that Befal all Virgins and Women in their Womb, After they are Ripe of Age.7. the Symptomes which are in Conception. 8. the Government of Women with Child. 9. the Symptomes that Happen in Child-Bearing. 10. the Government of Women in Child-Bed, and the Diseases that Come After Travel. 11. the Diseases of the Breasts. 12. the Symptomes of the Breasts. 13. the Diet and Government of Infants. 14. the Diseases and Symptomes in Children [Directory for midwives. Part 2 Practical physick; the fourth book.]. London: 1676.
Healy, Margaret. “National Healths: Gender, Sexuality and Health in a Cross-Cultural Context.” edited by Michael Worton and Nana Wilson-Tagoe. London : Portland, Or: UCL ; Cavendish Pub, 2004.
Laqueur, Thomas Walter. Making Sex: Body and Gender from the Greeks to Freud. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press, 1990.
Read, Sara. Menstruation and the Female Body in Early-Modern England. 1st edition. Houndmills, Basingstoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan, 2013.
Sharp, Jane, Mrs. The Midwives Book, Or, the Whole Art of Midwifry Discovered. Directing Childbearing Women how to Behave Themselves in their Conception, Breeding, Bearing, and Nursing of Children in Six Books, Viz. ... / by Mrs. Jane Sharp Practitioner in the Art of Midwifry Above Thirty Years [Midwives book]. London: 1671.
Sibly, Ebenezer. The medical mirror. Or treatise on the impregnation of the human female. Shewing the origin of diseases, and the principles of life and death. By E. Sibly, M. D. F.R.H.S. Of Titchfield-Street, Cavendish-Square, 2nd ed. London: printed for the author, and sold by Champante and Whitrow, Jewry-Street, Aldgate; and at the British Directory-Office, Ave-Maria-Lane, ST. Paul's, [1796?]. Eighteenth Century Collections Online.