We would like to thank Stephen Wheatcroft and Andre Zerger for generously sharing their geographic data on the Russian Empire, Nicholas Schamp for his research assistance, and NCEEER for generous funding. Our arguments and ideas benefited from suggestions and comments from Erin Baggott, Volha Charnysh, Maud Mandel, Stephen Pollock, Robert Self, members of the Brown Modern European History Workshop, and Russian Review's anonymous referees. We also would like to thank the editors of Russian Review for their work preparing the article for publication.
Public Health and Bathing in Late Imperial Russia: A Statistical Approach
Article first published online: 16 JAN 2013
Copyright 2013 The Russian Review
The Russian Review
Volume 72, Issue 1, pages 66–93, January 2013
How to Cite
KASHIN, K. and POLLOCK, E. (2013), Public Health and Bathing in Late Imperial Russia: A Statistical Approach. The Russian Review, 72: 66–93. doi: 10.1111/russ.10681
- Issue published online: 16 JAN 2013
- Article first published online: 16 JAN 2013
Going to the Russian bathhouse (bania) helped people preserve their health, at least according to common idioms and many medical doctors at the end of the nineteenth century and into the twentieth century. Yet the thousands of public bathhouses across the empire were often damp, dank, and overcrowded places conducive to the spread of infectious diseases. Were Russian Imperial bathhouses healthy or dangerous? Did they prevent and cure ailments or did they foster the spread of sickness and in turn increase mortality and incidence of disease? Qualitative reports from the period are inconclusive: some cite the benefits of bathhouses, others cite their threat to public health, and many note both. In this paper we use data from reports produced in the 1890s and early 1900s to undertake a statistical analysis of the health effects of public bathhouses in late Imperial Russia. To our knowledge, this is the first attempt to apply modern statistical techniques to questions of Russian health and hygiene in this period. We find no evidence to support doctors' claims that banias were beneficial to public health and instead find some evidence that banias were associated with higher incidence of disease.