Why did rich mothers not feed their children themselves, and Where did the nurses take their babies?

2024 Author: Richard Flannagan | [email protected]. Last modified: 2023-12-15 23:55

Why did they keep wet nurses in rich houses, and why mothers did not feed their children on their own? What happened to the children of the women themselves, hired to feed the offspring of the master? And, finally, why did the peasant women need all this? There are a lot of questions that arise regarding the topic of infant feeding in pre-revolutionary Russia, and the deeper you plunge into the topic, the more there are. Let's try to figure it out.

Who are the peasant nurses and why were they needed?

Usually, a girl from a peasant family who had just given birth was hired as a wet nurse, it often happened that it was a woman who was left without a husband, who found herself in a difficult life situation. For a woman applying for such a vacancy, a number of requirements were imposed: • she must be young, healthy, at least visually, have a little excess weight - this was considered a guarantee of successful feeding and “milkiness” of a woman; face, pleasant, non-blocky character; • but, at the same time, not being too beautiful, not all aristocrats would be delighted that a young beauty, full of health, appeared in their house, so she had to be definitely worse than the hostess, as simple as possible; • the character had to be calm, docile, meek disposition, the woman herself was beneficent; • good teeth (almost like a horse), were considered a sign of good health; that they are more "milky" than blondes who are not very cold, but redheads definitely could not apply for this position;

Of course, the main requirement for such a woman was the sympathy of the child, because they needed to establish direct close contact and it often happened that it was Barchuk who rejected one wet-nurse after another, so demandingly selected by the parents.

Why did the aristocrats and ladies not feed their children on their own?

Why there was a need for nurses at all is an ambiguous question, such were the foundations, and most women from the upper class refused to feed under the pressure of social dogmas, but not all. For example, Princess Maria wanted to feed her daughter on her own, but Emperor Nicholas I personally forbade her to do this. Any prerequisites of this kind were met with perplexity, if not categorically. But this was not always the case, until the 18th century, the wives of emperors and princesses independently fed the heirs, Catherine I is considered the last empress who did without a wet nurse.

There are several versions as to why high-born ladies refused the natural process, and even under pressure from the public. One of the leading is the low likelihood of subsequent pregnancy while breastfeeding. The mothers who are at the heart of the genus had to be very fertile, they had to give birth to the maximum number of children while they are young and healthy, preferably boys. Taking into account the infant and child mortality of those years, it becomes clear why the several years spent on lactation can be fundamentally important. Often, aristocrats who did not differ in health simply did not have enough milk in order to fully feed the heirs.

Other points are also no less important, for example, it was believed that feeding a child negatively affects the female figure (and childbirth, of course, not), makes her rude and deprives gracefulness, which is unacceptable for aristocrats. In addition, the spouse had to accompany her eminent spouse at social events, and sometimes during travels, so she simply could not be tied to a baby who needed feeding by the hour.

Dresses of noble ladies did not fit the lush "milk" breast, and were not designed for feeding babies, this only confirms that such requirements were not imposed on them.

Where were the nurses' own children?

The nurses had practically no opportunity to see and communicate with their own children. Most often, it was about weaning the mother from the child for the infancy, and whether he will survive without mother's milk and care is not so important. Most often, the child of the wet nurse remained to be raised by relatives, less often he was given to special foster homes (on the principle of orphanages), but there was a large deficit of food and a very high mortality rate.

If the nurse's child remained at home, then, as a rule, it was not a question of the mother's being able to visit him. This would mean that the woman would be in a peasant hut, and she was never distinguished by cleanliness, and the nurse could bring infection to the eminent offspring. For the same reason, they were practically not allowed out into the street and were not allowed close contact with strangers.

Most often, the wet-nurses had their own wet-nurses - relatives, neighbors, who had such an opportunity, fed the baby. Then it was extremely common and there was nothing surprising in feeding someone else's baby. Often the child left by the nurse died.

Towards the end of the 19th century, the rules began to loosen and there were more attempts to tackle issues individually. There are cases when not only the nurse herself lived at the court, but also her children, including the older ones. Even greater concessions are characteristic of the upper class, in any case it was decided individually, based on human relations. In general, the work of nurses was considered very godly, even if for this it was necessary to leave her child, because in this way she provided food for two children at once (or even an entire family) - a rich one and her own, since he received certain advantages, but more about them below.

What privileges did the nurses have?

Women who were breastfeeding were in a privileged position, they were treated gently, pampered and well fed. She was especially relied on sweets, because it was believed that this helps to increase milk production. On holidays and some events, gifts were given to her, like all family members, after they successfully completed their work, they were entitled to a certain gift, cash payment, bonus. For the peasant girls, this was very honorable, besides, they lived in a noble house, where they often remained in a different capacity for further work related to the child and caring for him. In the days of serfdom, these were perhaps the only privileges, since there was no question of any payment. Later, the breadwinners were entitled to allowance and other benefits. • The status of a breadwinner remained with the peasant woman for life and gave her certain privileges, in addition, one of her children became a “foster brother,” often such brothers even communicated and kept in touch. For example, Nicholas I communicated with his dairy relatives all his life and supported them. Friendship with the emperor is a pretty good ticket to life.• After the end of the feeding period, infants, breadwinners of wealthy families, received a lump sum payment, which was approximately equal to the annual salary of a civil servant. Huge money for peasant families • The nurse received a pension - a monthly allowance. In those days, even the highest ranks could not count on such support from the state. • On some major holidays, gifts were sent to them, and very solid ones. • The requests of former nurses were often fulfilled, and their requests played a decisive role, of course, within reason.

How the life of the nurses was arranged

In most cases, for the baby, the nurse was closer to his own mother, because it was with her that he spent most of the time. Breastfeeding usually continued for 2-3 years, and after the end of this period, the child was transferred to the care of teachers and other "educators".

It often happened that a noble offspring had several wet nurses, sometimes their number reached 4. But only royal families could afford such a luxury. It often happened that grown-up children took their wet nurses to themselves, for permanent residence, in order to provide them with a dignified old age. Peasant women considered this work very prestigious, because all they had to do was take care of the baby, replacing his mother - to feed, wash, care for and monitor his health. For women who have “seven on the benches” in their house, hard housework, household work, work in the field - life in a noble house seemed like paradise.

Despite the fact that there were often unscrupulous nurses who could give the child vodka so that he slept better, have an affair with the coachman and hide that she had lost milk, there were also those who were sincerely attached to the child. It was through the nurse that the child learned Russian speech, customs and traditions. Alexander Pushkin's nanny, Arina Rodionovna, was the nurse of the poet's sister and is a vivid example of how it was customary in families to treat those who were entrusted with their own offspring. Many Russian classics have the image of "mamushka" (the so-called wet-nurses, emphasizing their special position).

The end of the era of nurses

The practice of feeding other people's children begins to go away only by the 20th century, with the light hand of the empress, who by her own example, contrary to the rules, began to independently feed and raise her children, the attitude towards the institution of motherhood began to change. The nobles began to pay more attention to their own offspring and did not perceive them as something obligatory, but distracting from life. In addition, powdered milk formulas began to appear, which made nurses less in demand, even if the mother did not have enough milk.

Children entrusted to nannies and wet nurses often considered those who were directly involved in their upbringing as their closest people, and the values were laid by peasants and other educators from among the common people. If the nurses belonged to the privileged categories, then the rest were often used not only for hard work, but also for fun. Today it seems like a fantastic story like Russian noblemen mocked serfs to amaze guests with ballet.