Women's bathing dress holds a unique place in the history of American
costume. This specialized garb predates the age of sports costume which
arrived during the last half of the 19th century. Although bathing dress
shares this distinction with riding costume, the aquatic garb was merely
utilitarian in the late 18th century while riding costume had a
fashionable role. From its modest status, bathing gowns and later
bathing dresses became more important until their successor, the
swimming suit, achieved a permanent place among the outfits worn by 20th
century women. The social significance of this accomplishment was best
expressed by Foster Rhea Dulles, author of _America Learns to Play_, in
1940, when he wrote:
The modern bathing-suit ... symbolized the new status of women
even more than the short skirts and bobbed hair of the jazz age
or the athleticism of the devotees of tennis and golf. It was
the final proof of their successful assertion of the right to
enjoy whatever recreation they chose, costumed according to the
demands of the sport rather than the tabus of an outworn
prudery, and to enjoy it in free and natural association with
men.[1]
[1] FOSTER RHEA DULLES, _America Learns to Play, 1607-1940_ (New York:
D. Appleton-Century Company, 1940), p. 363.
Since the prescribed limitations of women's role in any given period are
determined and affected by many social factors, the evolution of the
bathing gown to the swimming suit may not only be dependent upon the
changes in the American woman's way of life, but also may reflect
certain technological and sociological factors that are not readily
identifiable. The purpose of this paper is to describe the changes in
women's bathing dress and wherever pertinent to present the factors
affecting these styles.[2]
[2] The author is indebted to Mrs. Anne W. Murray, formerly Curator
in Charge of American Costume, Smithsonian Institution, for the
interest she has shown throughout the research and writing of
this paper. The difficulties of this work would have been
greatly compounded without the benefit of her experience and
encouragement.
Anyone who attempts to research the topic of swimming and related
subjects will be confronted with a history of varying reactions. Ralph
Thomas, in 1904, described his experiences through the years that he
spent compiling a book on swimming:
When asked what I was doing, I have felt the greatest reluctance
to say a work on the literature of swimming. People who were
writing novels or some other thing of little practical utility
always looked at me with a smile of pity on my mentioning
swimming. Though I am bound to say that, when I gave them some
idea of the work, the pity changed somewhat but then they would
say "Why don't you give us a new edition of your Handbook of
Fictitious Names?" As if the knowledge of the real name of an
author was of any importance in comparison with the discussion
of a subject that more or less concerns every human being.[3]
[3] RALPH THOMAS, _Swimming_ (London: Sampson Low, Marsten & Company
Limited, 1904), p. 15.
Such reactions toward research about swimming probably discouraged many
serious efforts of writing about the subject. Its scant coverage and
even omission in histories of recreation or sports may be explained by
the fact that swimming cannot be categorized as simply physical
exercise, skill, recreation, or competitive sport. In trying to
determine the extent to which women swam in times past it is frustrating
to observe the historians' masculine bias in researching and reporting
social history.
A study of women's bathing dress meets with similar problems, and while
a discussion of bathing dress can evoke considerable interest, its
nature is usually considered more superficial than serious. Descriptions
of, and even brief references to, bathing apparel for women are very
scarce before the third quarter of the 19th century. Before this time
only decorative costume items were considered worthy of description and
bathing costume was not in this category. It is only within
comparatively recent times that costume historians have conceded
sufficient importance to bathing dress to include meaningful
descriptions in their research.
Participation in water activities was widespread in the ancient world
although the earliest origins of this activity are unknown. For example,
in Greece and, later, in Rome, swimming was valued as a pleasurable
exercise and superb physical training for warriors. The more sedentary
citizens turned to the baths which became the gathering point for
professional men, philosophers, and students. Thus bathing and swimming,
combined originally to fulfill the functions of cleansing and exercise
purely for physical well being, developed the secondary functions of
recreation and social intercourse.
With the rise of the Christian church and its spreading anti-pagan
attitudes, many of the sumptuous baths were destroyed. Christian
asceticism also may have contributed to the decline of bathing for
cleansing. In addition there was a secular belief that outdoor bathing
helped to spread the fearful epidemics that periodically swept the
continent. Although there is isolated evidence that swimming was valued
as a physical skill,[4] swimming and bathing all but disappeared during
the Middle Ages.
[4] JOSEPH STRUTT, _The Sports and Pastimes of the People of England_
(London: Chatto and Windus, 1876), pp. 151-152.
In 1531, long after the Middle Ages, Sir Thomas Elyot wrote of swimming
that
There is an exercise, whyche is right profitable in extreme
danger of warres, but ... it hathe not ben of longe tyme muche
used, specially amoge noble men, perchaunce some reders whl
lyttell esteeme it.[5]
[5] SIR THOMAS ELYOT, _The Boke Named the Governour_ (London, 1557),
vol. 1, pp. 54-55.
This early English writer gave no instructions, but expounded on the
value of swimming as a skill that could be useful in time of war.
It herewith becomes necessary to differentiate between bathing and
swimming with their attendant goals, for it was the goals of each
activity which influenced the associated customs and costume designs.
For this discussion we shall define bathing as the act of immersing all
or part of the body in water for cleansing, therapeutic, recreational,
or religious purposes, and swimming as the self-propulsion of the body
through water. When we refer to swimming it is necessary to distinguish
whether it was considered a useful skill, a therapeutic exercise, a
recreation, or a competitive sport. Thus it is important to note that
while bathing for all purposes and swimming as a physical exercise,
recreation, and sport died out during the Middle Ages, the latter
continued to be valued as a skill, particularly for warriors. This
function of swimming survived to form the link between the ancients and
the 17th century.
According to Ralph Thomas, the first book on swimming was written by
Nicolas Winmann, a professor of languages at Ingolstadt in Bavaria, and
printed in 1528. The first book published in England on swimming was
written in Latin by Everard Digby and printed in 1587. As Thomas has
stated, Digby's book
... is entitled to a far more important place than the first of
the world, because, whereas Winmann had never (up to 1866) been
translated or copied or even quoted by any one, Digby has been
three times translated; twice into English and once into French
and through this latter became and probably still is the best
known treatise on the subject.[6]
[6] THOMAS, op. cit. (footnote 3), p. 172.
This French version was first published in 1696 with its purported
author being Monsieur Melchisedesh Thevenot. In his introduction
Thevenot indicates that he has made use of Digby's book in his own
treatise and that he knows of Winmann's publication. The English
translation of Thevenot's version became the standard instruction book
for English-speaking peoples. Typically, his reasons in favor of men
swimming were based on its being a useful skill (i.e., to keep from
being drowned in a shipwreck, to escape capture when being pursued by
enemies, and to attack an enemy posted on the opposite side of a
river).[7]
[7] MELCHISEDESH THEVENOT, _The Art of Swimming_ (London: John Lever,
1789), pp. 4-5.
In the 18th and 19th centuries numerous other publications on swimming
appeared--too numerous to deal with in this paper. Nevertheless, the
refinement of the art of swimming was not related to the number of
instruction books. Few of these books actually offered new insights in
comparison with those that were outright plagiarisms or filled with
misinformation. In the meantime, bathing was reintroduced and as this
activity became more widespread swimming was regarded as more than a
useful skill, but only for men.
There is little evidence of women bathing or swimming prior to the 17th
century; these activities seem to have been exclusively for men.
Nevertheless, Thomas refers to Winmann as writing, in 1538, that
at Zurich in his day (thus implying that he was an elderly man
and that the custom had ceased) the young men and maidens bathed
together around the statue of "Saint Nicolai." Even in those
days his pupil asks "were not the girls ashamed of being naked?"
"No, as they wore bathing drawers--sometimes a marriage was
brought about." If any young man failed to bring up stones from
the bottom, when he dived, he had to suffer the penalty of
wearing drawers like the girls.[8]
[8] THOMAS, op. cit. (footnote 3), p. 161.
Thomas goes on to say that the only evidence he had found of women
swimming in England in early days was in a ballad entitled "The Swimming
Lady" and dating from about 1670. Despite these isolated references it
was not until the 19th century that women were encouraged to swim.
After its decline in the Middle Ages, bathing achieved new popularity as
a medicinal treatment for both men and women. In England this revival
occurred in the 17th century when certain medical men held that bathing
in fresh water had healing properties. The resultant spas, which were
developed at freshwater springs to effect such "cures," expanded rapidly
as the number of their devotees increased. By the mid-18th century,
rival practitioners claimed even greater health-giving properties for
sea water both as a drink and for bathing. An economic benefit resulted
when, tiny, poverty-stricken fishing hamlets became famous through the
patronage of the wealthy in search of health as well as pleasure.
When the early colonists left England in the first half of the 17th
century, the beliefs and practices they had acquired in their original
homes were brought to the new world. Thus, it is important to note that
during this period in Europe, swimming was a skill practiced by few,
primarily soldiers and sailors. It was not until the second half of the
century that bathing for therapeutic purposes was becoming popular in
the old world.
The earliest reference to women's bathing costume has been quoted
previously in Winmann's amazing description of mixed bathing at Zurich.
He referred to women, wearing only drawers, bathing with men as a custom
no longer practiced when he wrote his book in 1538.
One of the earliest illustrations of bathing costume I have located is
part of a painted fan leaf, about 1675, that was reproduced in volume 9
of Maurice Leloir's _Histoire du Costume de l'Antiquite_ in 1914. In one
corner of this painting, which depicts a variety of activities going on
in the Seine and on the river banks at Paris, women are shown immersing
themselves in water within a covered wooden frame. They are wearing
loose, light-colored gowns and long headdresses. An English source of
the late 17th century described a very similar costume.
The ladye goes into the bath with garments made of yellow
canvas, which is stiff and made large with great sleeves like a
parson's gown. The water fills it up so that it's borne off that
your shape is not seen, it does not cling close as other
lining.[9]
[9] CELIA FIENNES, _Through England on Horseback_, as quoted in IRIS
BROOKE and JAMES LAVER, _English Costume from the Fourteenth
through the Nineteenth Century_ (New York: The Macmillan Company,
1937), p. 252.
In the course of my contacts with other costume historians I have
encountered the belief that women did not wear any bathing costume
before the mid-19th century. Supporting this theory I have seen a
reproduction of a print, about 1812, showing women bathing nude in the
ocean at Margate, England, but the evidence already presented indicates
clearly that costume was worn earlier. Also certain English secondary
sources refer to a nondescript chemise-type of bathing dress that was
worn during the first quarter of the 19th century. Because little study
has been given European bathing costume, it is not possible to
conjecture under what circumstances costume was or was not used. We do
know, however, that when bathing became popular in the new world bathing
gowns were worn by some women in the old.