LTC3 Hygenic Roman Baths

[Tzeentch]

-- My hopes that LTC3 would address how decidedly UN-hygenic Roman baths could be in practice were dashed! Oh, the humanity!

-- For a more cynical take on Bathing and Bath-Houses, p. 37, see:

Scobie, Alex. Slums, Sanitation, and Mortality in the Roman World. KLIO 68

BTW first thread about LTC3 :)~

[Bruno]

I'm not terribly surprised - I've caught plantars warts from the public pools and surrounding floors often enough that I know even water so chlorinated it makes my eyes water and errodes my bathing suit can't make public baths hygenic... and with those modern public baths expect you to be reasonably clean before getting into the pool in the first place!

At least the Romans had pumice stones for scraping the little blights off.

[Purple Haze]

The Romans still managed to set a standard for hygene that wouldn't be equalled for ~1500 years.

[Tzeentch]

-- It could be argued that was in spite of their particular bathing practices (e.g. the sick and infirm used the baths first).

[Purple Haze]

As opposed to: "I take a bath once per year, whether I need it or not." -- Elizabeth I.

[Dangerious P. Cats]

I may need to look into this a little more but from what I understand it's somewhat over stated how dirty people of the middle ages were, especailly given the tendancy of people in the victorian period to portray the periods that came before as savage and uncivilised.

[Lupo]

Originally Posted by Purple Haze

The Romans still managed to set a standard for hygene that wouldn't be equalled for ~1500 years.

This is likely. Nevertheless, it appears the "bath once a year" thing is largely a myth, or at least something restricted to certain places and/or times. E.g. where the climate was cold, or there were strong taboos against nudity...

For example, it sounds strange that people living in hot, wet climates would not bath themselves in rivers, lakes and the like.
Why wouldn't they? If it's hot, bathing or at least "splashing" oneself with fresh, unheated water is not displeasing at all. If only to remove some of the dirt and sweat.

The same goes for coastal and river populations - if you are a fisherman or a rice farmer (or even just if you do the laundry at the river^^) you are pretty much forced to bathe and to let your clothes dry... (even if you are not a good swimmer).
Even many dogs and other non-acquatic animals like to swim and "bathe" as soon as they have a chance to do so. Little children loves to bathe. Why low-tech humans should be so dirt-loving?

The following (unsourced) websites argue that people in the Middle Ages bathed more than we think, and more than "their descendants up to the 19th century":

http://www.triviumpublishing.com/art...iddleages.html
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_pe...in_middle_ages
http://www.medieval-life.net/bathing.htm

The last one argues that
"as the forests were depleted, firewood became expensive and the rising costs of heating the water forced most of the bathhouses to close. (...) By the mid-1300s, only the very wealthy could afford firewood for hot water in the winter. The rest of the population was forced to be dirty most of the time."
(Note that the mid-1300s is the very end of the Middle Ages; the last century of a millennium-long era. And that many, if not most, countries do not have any appreciable "winter", think about the southern mediterranean, West Asia, North Africa, India, Southeast Asia...)

Wikipedia has a section on the Western history of Bathing:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bathing#Western_history
It lists a few "practical" and ethical issues which made bathing less and less common just after the Middle Ages.

The wikianswers site, above, says that
"The Danes are described as generally bathing once a week; the Anglo-Saxons less often."

If I were a Dane in the middle age, in freezing climate with no hot water easily available, I really doubt I would bathe more than once a week. Actually I'd say that someone who bathed once a week in that conditions, was quite brave and/or really into personal hygiene.

So perhaps the oppositon to bathing was typical of Anglo-saxons in certain times, and it has been popularized as "universal of everybody in the middle ages" because of the worldwide influence of Anglo-saxon culture...
Just as the modern image of fantasy is largely shaped on British middle-age, and most westerners if you say "middle age" will think about Robin Hood and green forests rather than, say, Italian Comuni or Moorish Spain...
But that's just a conjecture on my part, if somebody knows more about history of bathing across different countries and ages (and about the hygiene practices of modern low-tech societies populations), I am ready to be corrected.

[Bruno]

There's also a difference between cleaning yourself and bathing. It's entirely possible to clean yourself without immersing yourself in water, or even significantly taking your clothes off (should nudity be an issue due to climate or religious/cultural reasons).

Sponge baths don't require nearly as much water to be heated, nor carted around. I'm a huge fan of long hot baths for various reasons, but even while camping I've managed to wash up myself "acceptably" with just a billy can of water - that's about a litre (or a quart). I still wanted a bath when I got home, but it's hard to shake me of that habit.

[nik1979]

Roman Baths or Public Baths should be more tackled in City Building IMO. It modifies morale and sanitation (which affects city size, health and resistance to disease).

If there were to be a more effective City and Community Building (designed to work with Mass Combat) I'm up for paying for that as well. Particularly one that calculates low tech GDP based a basic economic units like Families instead of Raw Population figures. Particularly something that allows for setting up Villages. Basically something more useful in tracking Cities, Holdings, Retainers and Land Assets which is pretty much the Conquerers (and Would-be Conqueror's) currency more than just Currency.

I recommend Kenneth Harl's work on Historical Economics should be a great resource for these. (His name as a search term brings up a lot of Byzantine and Roman economics).

As for LTC3, I wish it detailed horses a bit more. Although I'm open to spending $3-$5 on a Horses Low tech companion. Tables and TLs for Horses, riding perks or techniques, sample breeds and incorporating present day's rich sources and sciences on horses.

I'm aware I'm a very niche and particular concerns, but over all the I find LTC3 much more useful than LTC1, and more useful than LTC2 (w/c IMO should have more mass combat compatible stats and recommendations).

[Rabiddave]

Originally Posted by Dangerious P. Cats

I may need to look into this a little more but from what I understand it's somewhat over stated how dirty people of the middle ages were, especailly given the tendancy of people in the victorian period to portray the periods that came before as savage and uncivilised.

I agree.

Bathouses --and other practices associated with them-- were certainly not unknown during the middle ages:

http://www.gallowglass.org/jadwiga/p...thkeepers.html

Additionally, there are quite a few accounts of people drowning while bathing in rivers or streams, or doing the laundry.