Main  Contacts  
Table of contents
PREFACE
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.1
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.2
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.3
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.4
THE MOTHER AND HER CHILD-1.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.4
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.5
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.6
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.7
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.8
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.9
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.10
SEXUAL EDUCATION-2.11
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.1
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.2
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.3
SEXUAL EDUCATION AND NAKEDNESS-3.4
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.1
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.2
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.3
THE VALUATION OF SEXUAL LOVE-4.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.1
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.2
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.3
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.4
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.5
THE FUNCTION OF CHASTITY-5.6
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.1
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.2
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.3
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.4
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.5
THE PROBLEM OF SEXUAL ABSTINENCE-6.6
PROSTITUTION-7.1
PROSTITUTION-7.2
PROSTITUTION-7.3
PROSTITUTION-7.4
PROSTITUTION-7.5
PROSTITUTION-7.6
PROSTITUTION-7.7
PROSTITUTION-7.8
PROSTITUTION-7.9
PROSTITUTION-7.10
PROSTITUTION-7.11
PROSTITUTION-7.12
PROSTITUTION-7.13
PROSTITUTION-7.14
PROSTITUTION-7.15
FOOTNOTES-1
FOOTNOTES-2

the Devil. The French Picards, at a much later date, insisted on 

public nakedness, believing that God had sent their leader into 

the world as a new Adam to reestablish the law of Nature; they 

were persecuted and were finally exterminated by the Hussites. 

 

In daily life, however, a considerable degree of nakedness was 

tolerated during mediaeval times. This was notably so in the 

public baths, frequented by men and women together. Thus Alwin 

Schultz remarks (in his _Hoefische Leben zur Zeit der 

Minnesaenger_), that the women of the aristocratic classes, though 

not the men, were often naked in these baths except for a hat and 

a necklace. 

 

It is sometimes stated that in the mediaeval religious plays Adam 

and Eve were absolutely naked. Chambers doubts this, and thinks 

they wore flesh-colored tights, or were, as in a later play of 

this kind, "apparelled in white leather" (E.K. Chambers, _The 

Mediaeval Stage_, vol. i, p. 5). It may be so, but the public 

exposure even of the sexual organs was permitted, and that in 

aristocratic houses, for John of Salisbury (in a passage quoted 

by Buckle, _Commonplace Book_, 541) protests against this custom. 

 

The women of the feminist sixteenth century in France, as R. de 

Maulde la Claviere remarks (_Revue de l'Art_, Jan., 1898), had no 

scruple in recompensing their adorers by admitting them to their 

toilette, or even their bath. Late in the century they became 

still less prudish, and many well-known ladies allowed themselves 

to be painted naked down to the waist, as we see in the portrait 

of "Gabrielle d'Estrees au Bain" at Chantilly. Many of these 

pictures, however, are certainly not real portraits. 

 

Even in the middle of the seventeenth century in England 

nakedness was not prohibited in public, for Pepys tells us that 

on July 29, 1667, a Quaker came into Westminster Hall, crying, 

"Repent! Repent!" being in a state of nakedness, except that he 

was "very civilly tied about the privities to avoid scandal." 

(This was doubtless Solomon Eccles, who was accustomed to go 

about in this costume, both before and after the Restoration. He 

had been a distinguished musician, and, though eccentric, was 

apparently not insane.) 

 

In a chapter, "De la Nudite," and in the appendices of his book, 

_De l'Amour_ (vol. i, p. 221), Senancour gives instances of the 

occasional practice of nudity in Europe, and adds some 

interesting remarks of his own; so, also, Dulaure (_Des Divinites 

Generatrices_, Ch. XV). It would appear, as a rule, that though 

complete nudity was allowed in other respects, it was usual to 

cover the sexual parts. 

 

The movement of revolt against nakedness never became completely 

victorious until the nineteenth century. That century represented the 

triumph of all the forces that banned public nakedness everywhere and 

altogether. If, as Pudor insists, nakedness is aristocratic and the 

slavery of clothes a plebeian characteristic imposed on the lower classes 

by an upper class who reserved to themselves the privilege of physical 

culture, we may perhaps connect this with the outburst of democratic 

plebeianism which, as Nietzsche pointed out, reached its climax in the 

nineteenth century. It is in any case certainly interesting to observe 

that by this time the movement had entirely changed its character. It had 

become general, but at the same time its foundation had been undermined. 

It had largely lost its religious and moral character, and instead was 


Page 3 from 5:  Back   1   2  [3]  4   5   Forward