Idealized pictures like this masked the realities of Victorian childbirth
One woman in the more "modern" 1890's, remembered "twenty-four hours of intense suffering with an ignorant attendant" whose only contribution was to offer assurances the pain would get worse. Finally "a kindly neighbor" sent the new mother's apparently equally useless husband for the doctor. By that point she was so exhausted she couldn't help herself and her baby "was brought into the world with instruments" and without "an anesthetic." No wonder a modern historian described Victorian childbirth as "a dangerous, painful and generally unpleasant time."
Both Mary and James R. obviously survived the experience, but their problems were far from over. The next question for Mary was how to support herself and her infant son. As noted previously we have no idea where Mary was living at the time other than she gave birth in Astley. Everything is, therefore, conjecture, but it's possible she was living with her Uncle William and Aunt Ann Ricketts (Samuel's brother and sister neither of whom ever married) who lived in Astley at the time. Or she could have been living with someone else in Astley, helping in the household or doing other odd jobs to provide food and shelter for herself and her infant son. Another possibility is the workhouse, although in that case the birth would have taken place within the institution.
1851 Census showing siblings Ann (eight up from bottom) and William (seven up) Ricketts
If, on the other hand, William was, in fact, James' father, his time away from his regiment in the late 1850's could have been spent helping provide for his "family." Between the two of them, they might have been able to manage child care and earn enough money (in addition to William's army pay) for food and shelter. Mary's ability to find work would also have been hampered by the moral issues around her position as a single mother or "fallen women" in the parlance of the day. According to one historian, Victorians believed any woman "who indulged in sexual gratification for its own sake rather than for procreation degraded her womanhood." This may not have mattered as much among the rural poor, but it would have mattered a great deal in finding employment in respectable society and, as we shall see, respectability was one of the Victorian's highest social values.
Although the above is an American Civil War era photo it gives a sense of the physical labor involved in doing laundry
Shortly after the birth of her second child in 1861, Mary's occupation was listed as laundress and at the time of her marriage, a little over a year later, she said she worked as a char or cleaning woman. Like agricultural laborers, these were among the lowest paid jobs, but occupations where respectability was probably of far less importance. At the time, laundry was very strenuous labor, involving soaking clothing in large tubs, followed by scrubbing on a washboard, boiling in copper tubs, rinsing and hanging to dry with a repeat performance for "colored" items. Both jobs could have offered some flexibility in working hours since the work could have been done outside of regular business hours. In such a position, Mary could have earned some money and arranged for some kind of child care at an affordable cost.
Victorian charwoman
In the final analysis as with childbirth, Mary somehow provided for her son and herself, perhaps with William's help and/or the assistance of others. When she became pregnant with James, Mary faced multiple obstacles and adversity, how much of it was of her own making, we will probably never know. What is far more important, however, is that faced with adversity, she more than rose to the occasion and met those challenges. In doing so Mary demonstrated a toughness that would be in even greater demand in 1860 when she realized, she was pregnant for the second time.
No comments:
Post a Comment