It properly belongs to this chapter to allude to the rise and progress of the diseases termed syphilitic.
Whether they were of ancient date—whether the “shameful diseases” which have been mentioned in the chapter devoted to prostitution at Rome were the same as the modern syphilis—may be decided by the reader. It will suffice here to say that, throughout the Middle Ages, a species of disease, termed sometimes leprosy, sometimes pudendagra, appears to have prevailed in France as in other European countries, and to have chosen for its chief seat the organs of generation. It was not, however, till the close of the fifteenth century that public attention began to be generally directed to the subject of sexual disease.
We shall briefly enumerate the earliest notices of its appearance. When Charles VIII. entered Naples in 1495, he found the city suffering from a plague (syphilis) to which the prejudice of the natives gave the name of “French malady.” Italy, said the writers of the day, was attacked simultaneously by the French army and this new disease.[198] Most of the Italian writers accuse the French of its introduction. Benevenis, however, says they got it from the Spaniards, and Guicciardini candidly admits that his countrymen were the real propagators of the malady. German physicians likewise traced its origin to Naples, and placed it about the year 1493,[199] ascribing it to an untoward planetary conjunction. The disease appeared at Barcelona in 1493, and in other parts of Spain in the following year.[200] But sixty years before, in 1430, public regulations had been made in London to prevent the admission of persons attacked with a disease very similar to syphilis into houses of prostitution, and requiring the police to keep constant watch over such as should show symptoms of this infirmitas nefanda.[201] The first authentic allusion to the disease in France is the ordinance of the Parliament of Paris, dated 1497, ordering all persons attacked by the “large pox” to vacate the city within twenty-four hours, and not to return till they were cured; providing a sort of hospital for those who can not move; and appointing agents to bestow four sols parisis on the exiles to pay for their journey.[202] This ordinance alludes to the disease having been prevalent for two years.
It may therefore be taken for granted that, whether syphilitic diseases had existed before or not, they prevailed to a very alarming extent throughout Europe at the close of the fifteenth century.
To prevent misconception, it may be as well to give the diagnostic signs of the “French malady” as furnished by Fracastor: “The patients were in low spirits, and broken down; their faces were pale. Most of them had chancres upon the organs of generation. These chancres were obstinate; when cured in one place they reappeared in another, and the work was never ended. Pustules with a hard surface appeared upon the skin, generally on the head first. On first appearing they were small, but gradually increased to the size of an acorn, which they resembled in shape. In some cases they were dry, in others humid; some were livid, others white and pale, others again hard and reddish. They burst after a few days, and discharged an incredible quantity of vile fetid humor. When they began to suppurate they became true phagedænic ulcers, consuming both flesh and bone. When they attacked the upper part of the body they gave rise to malign fluxions, which gnawed away the palate, or the windpipe, or the throat, or the tonsils. Some patients lost their lips, others the nose, others the eyes, others the whole organs of generation. Many were troubled with moist tumors on the limbs, which grew as large as eggs or small loaves. When they burst, a white and mucilaginous liquor exuded from them. They were usually found on the legs and arms. Some were ulcerated, others again remained callous to the last. And, as if this was not enough, the patients suffered terrible pains, especially at night, not only in the articulations, but in the limbs and nerves. Some sufferers, however, had pustules without pains, others pains without pustules; but, in most cases, both occurred together. The patients were languid, had no appetite, desired to remain constantly in bed. The face and legs swelled. Some had a slight fever, but this was rare; others had severe headaches for which no remedy could be found.”[203]
At first, it seems, the faculty, strangely misapprehending its duties, refused to treat patients assailed by this new plague. As at Rome, they were left to the tender mercies of quacks, barbers, and old women. About the beginning of the sixteenth century, however, the extent of the mischief provoked sympathy from the physicians, and one or two treatises appeared on the subject. Sudorifics seem to have been the chief agent employed. Large use was made of holy wood (the wood of the lignum-vitæ-tree), which was imported from America for the purpose. It was doses of holy wood, in decoction, which are said to have saved the life of the great Erasmus.
After the passage of the law of 1497, a house in the Faubourg St. Germain was appropriated to the reception of the victims of syphilis; but there is no reason to believe that any attempt was made to treat them there. They were left to die, or to quack themselves. Eighteen years after, in 1505, the house in question being too small for the numbers of the sick, and it being clearly shown that syphilis was not contagious except by sexual intercourse or positive peculiar contact with the person afflicted, a new decree of Parliament appropriated funds for the construction of “a hospital for persons attacked by the large pox (les grands vérolés),” and directed that they should be properly cared for.[204] This decree was never carried into effect. Thirty years afterward the condition of the sick was far worse than it had ever been, they being left to die in the streets. A new decree, in 1535, appointed commissioners to choose a locality for a hospital; and, notwithstanding some opposition from the religious authorities, they performed their task. A small hospital was appropriated to syphilitic patients, and persons suffering from itch, epilepsy, and St. Vitus’s dance. It was soon filled, and several patients were thrust into the same bed. Owing to mismanagement on the part of the directors, it was short of linen, lint, and medicine. The Parliament interfered, but without success; and, in despair, the unfortunate sufferers contrived to effect an entrance into the hospital general, the Hotel Dieu. They were soon admitted on the same terms as other sufferers; but, as the establishment was far too small to accommodate all who sought refuge there, they were thrust four and five together into the same bed, and persons with syphilitic diseases lay by the side of men in contagious fevers, and others with broken legs and arms.
The Parliament interfered a second time. The municipal officers of Paris were assembled, and called upon to provide a hospital for venereal cases; but for many years the strenuous opposition of the Hotel Dieu neutralized all the efforts that were made. It was not till 1614 that the project of the Parliament was realized, and a syphilitic hospital actually opened.
Up to this time, that is to say, for a period of a century and a quarter, persons attacked by venereal disease were left to the care of Providence. Males could, with some exertion, occasionally obtain admission to the Hotel Dieu, where they often contracted new diseases without getting rid of the old; but of females, not a word had yet been spoken. No one in that hundred and twenty-five years had ever raised a voice to plead on behalf of the prostitutes; it never seems to have occurred, even to the Parliament which had so much sympathy for the pauvres vérolés, that the women likewise deserved pity and attention.
We possess no information with regard to the treatment used in this new hospital. It is certain, however, that, in obedience to the law of its foundation, patients were soundly whipped when they entered and when they left it, by way of punishing them for having contracted the disease. In 1675 the managers of the hospital declared that this practice deterred many sick persons from coming forward and confessing their condition; but it prevailed, apparently, for a quarter of a century afterward.