Memoria y flujo absoluto de la conciencia

the pavillon de l’orangerie, which stood separate from the main house (figs. 45-6). It comprised

a greater number of rooms than Savot had noted. In the Encyclopédie, part of the entry Bains,

contributed by J-F. Blondel, reads: “...N ous appelons bains domestiques ceux que l’on

pratique dans la maison des grands ou des particuiiers: iis se prennent dans des baignoires de

métai; dans lesquelies i’eau est amenée p ar des conduits de plomb qui descendent d ’un

réservoir un peu éievé, rempii de i’eau du ciel, ou par le secours d ’une pompe. Ces tuyaux

garnis de robinets, viennent avant d’entrer dans la baignoire, se distribuer dans une cuve placée

sur un fourneau, qui la tient dans un degré de chaleur convenablé’ (fig. 4 7).288 Thus by this

time private baths, in use by les grandes, were plumbed to receive rain water which had

collected in tanks. The water, both cold and hot, was fed through lead pipes to the bath, where it was regulated by taps. The suite of rooms which made up the appartement des bains consisted

of an: “...Antl-chambre pour tenir les domestiques pendant que ie maître est en Bain, d ’une

chambre-à-lit pour s ’y coucher au sortir du Bain, d ’une salle où est placée la baignoire, d ’un

cabinet a soûpape ou d’une garderobe, d ’un cabinet de toilet, d ’une étuve pour sécher les

linges et chauffer l’eau, d’un dégagement etc.” (fig. 45). This gives some idea of the use to

which these spaces were put. For Le Camus de Mezières, bains were made up of four main

spaces and several minor ones. His suggestion was that the bath itself should not rest on the floor, but be sunk into it for greater ease of getting in and out, with the top of the rim no higher than eight or nine inches above the surrounding floor level.289

Baths taken for luxury or for health rather than for hygiene were called, according to Furetière (1690), after the substances in which women had immersed themselves: milk, rose water, blood of Innocents, steam and so on. 290 The chronicler Dr Cabanès implied that women received visitors while in their bath, and that a milk bath would hide voluptuous body contours.291 For the

than private bathrooms alone: “...il y en a de particuliers et de publics. Ces derniers sont

entretenus par les baigneurs...” Even the few who had their own baths at home frequented

their baigneur regularly. Visiting the baigneur had a double meaning. Cabanès noted that

Taiiemant de Réaux and others considered that for greatest seignieurs to: “aller coucher chez ie

baigneur ", signified a night spent in debauchery. The best known brothel was kept by one M.

Prud’homme who was promoted to the status of baigneur in 1643. It was there that Louis XIV

went to be bathed and perfumed in his youth. He subsequently elevated Prud’homme to the status of Premier Valet de Chambre.292

In addition to spiritual, moral and social teachings, manuals of civilité, include rules of practical or

physical behaviour, particularly for the young. These covered matters of hygiene and personal appearance. In this vein the Nouveau Traité de la Civilité Françoise (1684), under the section

“De i’uriner et des autres nécessitez”, poses the question: “Que doit-ii faire quand H aura besoin

d’uriner? ’’ and answers it: “ // se sépara des autres pour uriner hors de leur presence..." Similarly

the question “Que doit il faire, s ’il estoit pressé de roter et de peter ? ” is answered: “// ie fera ie

plus secrètement qu’il iuy sera possible...”.293 De La Salle’s Les Regies de la Bienscéance, as

late as 1774, states that “Pour les besoins naturels, H est de la bienséance (aux enfant même)

de n ’y satisfaire que dans des lieux ou’on soit pas apperçu.”29A That is, it appears that toilets

could not have been in general use despite many royal, and police declarations. De La Salle further says that “// n ’est jamais séant de parier des parties du corps qui doivent toujours être

cachées, ni de certaines nécessités du corps auxquelles la nature nous a assujettie, ni même de les nommer. . . ".295

Judging from the use of spittoons, spitting must have been considered acceptable in houses. Spittoons, like chamber-pots, needed emptying and they were apparently emptied in the same

w a y .296 The manuais instructed the chiid to turn away when spitting, so as not to soil anyone.

Erasmus advised that if it was not possible to turn away, one should spit into a handkerchief. He aiso recommends procedures for coughing, yawning and vomiting in company.297 Spitting out of the window or into the fire was considered unacceptable.

Sneezing in company is also covered in some manuals. According to Erasmus (1537): “...c ’est

felt inclined to sneeze, one was to turn, cover one's face with a handkerchief, and thank those who blessed one.299 The Nouveau Traité de la Civilité Françoise (1684) takes an abstract,

anatomical view when it asks: “Outre ia respiration combien y a-t-ii de sortes de vents, qui sortent

du corps humain? The reply to this was three. It then asks were they originate, and answers:

the first, “Du deriere; ii est honteux, & H donne de ia confusiorf, the second, “De i’estomach,

donne du m épris..” whilst the third issues “Du cerveau, qui est ie siege de l’ame; c ’est un bon

signe d’une mauvaise cause...signe de santé & mérite honneur & benediction.” In the company

of someone who sneezed, one therefore had to raise one’s hat and make a sign of reverence (responding “God bless you” in a loud voice was not the done thing).3oo

Manuals made no mention of washing one’s body. Reference was made only to those parts of the body which were visible when fully dressed. Exposing one’s nudity, even to oneself, was not approved of by writers of the period, and the religious ones involved God and original sin. It therefore seems difficult to believe that baths were much used by those who faithfully adhered to Christian teachings. From architectural treatises and other sources it is apparent that the possession of baths was more prevalent among the rich, but it is impossible to know how much they were actually put to use. The missionary who wrote La Civiiité Puérile et Honneste (1757)

spells out the religious reason for never exposing one’s body. One is never alone, as God is always there to see us: “...qu’aucune partie de votre corps ne paroisse nue, quand mesme vous

seriez seul dans ia chambre...cacher ce que ia nature ne veut pas qui paroisse, & faites cela pour

ie respect de ia Majesté d’un Dieu qui vous vo/Y...”.3oi De La Salle (1774) discusses shame in

relation to original sin: “ Le plus sensible effet du péché dans Adam, immédiatement après l’avoir

commis, fut ia honte que fit naître en lui ia vue de sa nudité; ii sentit aussi tôt quelle étoit ia

nécessité d’un vêtement...Le Seigneur fit à Adam & à sa femme, des habits de peaux, & les en

rèvêtit. Gen, 3 V 21. Héritiers de son crime, nous somme astreints aux mêmes besoins.” (the

1729 and 1744 are less explicit on original sin, but they do state that as it caused people to dress in the first place, being fully clothed befits both modesty and God’s law s.302). Consequently, as soon as a child could freely use his arms de La Salle thought that he should be trained to dress himself and not to rely on someone else to assist him, someone who might witness his nudity.303 Beyond this. La Salle believed that it was improper even to speak of the body: “Ii n ’est jamais séant de parier du partie du corps qui doivent toujours être cachées, ni de

with a sick person: “...les termes dont on se servira, ne puissent, en rien choquer ia