During his lifetime, James Graham was infamous for his unusual ideas. Known as the “King of Quacks,”[1] he lectured openly about sexual dysfunction and his electrical “cures” for it, dug people into holes in the ground so they could absorb nutrients from the soil like a plant, and even made himself the Messiah of a new religion. Unsurprising then that he went down as “one of those colourful sub-plot clowns in the tragicomedy of history.” [2] After this grumble about Graham’s reputation, Roy Porter encourages people to see him as more than a bogus doctor unworthy of study.[3] One thing that has been forgotten however, beneath the dazzle of Graham’s vibrating electric bed and the splendour of his Temple of Health, is that “cleanliness – from the top of the head, to the end of the most diligent toe” was his most prized cure.[4] Examining this aspect of Graham helps to resolve the main issue that people have with him: how could somebody so reliant on making money by marketing himself and making sex machines, also preach about the power of nature, water, morality and vegetarianism?[5]  Investigating Graham’s compulsive cleanliness through the lens of Mary Douglas’s anthropological writing helps us understand how Graham negotiated his strange position in society, and formed his medical opinions.

Graham’s promotion of “continual washings, bathing and syringings” in his Lecture on the Generation, Increase and Improvement of the Human Species… (1783)[6] was pretty unusual at a time when “most men resident in London, and very many ladies […] neglect[ed] washing their bodies from year to year.”[7] Yet as his recent biographer Syson notes, Graham never really gave a medical justification for his unusual obsession with cleanliness.[8]  It is my view that Graham’s advocacy of hygiene can be explained most clearly by Mary Douglas’s argument in Purity and Danger (1966). Douglas suggests that our distaste for dirt goes beyond worries that it will make us sick;[9] instead, she wants us to think about it in a more general way, as “matter out of place.”[10] This makes sense if you think about it. It explains why I have an absurd phobia of washing up food that I was happily eating five minutes before, and my disgust when my sister puts her feet on the kitchen table. But Douglas takes it further than that, and uses this idea to understand society as a whole. She suggests that societies are based on the idea of order, and therefore anything outside of the mainstream is a potential threat, which may need cleaning away. [11] We could think about this in relation to a certain impending wall in America, or the fact that Western countries are arguably disproportionately worried about anti-Western cultures and terrorism when the average American is statistically more likely to be die being hit by lightening or even an asteroid.[12] This concept has been useful for historians of medicine too, particularly in relation to people like Graham whose ideas are pretty rogue.[13]

Law and (Dis)order

Graham’s most infamous publication (although perhaps not the most bizarre) was, as mentioned above, A Lecture on the Generation, Increase and Improvement of the Human Species…[14] (henceforth Lecture). A key inspiration for this work was Thomas Short’s A Comparative History of the Increase and Decrease of Mankind… (1767), which supposedly proved the population of England was decreasing, and suggested subsequent societal causes and remedies.[15]  Like Short, Graham attempts to promote “the increase, – the health – the elevation […] of the human species,” by encouraging people to have sex and giving advice on how to have more healthy children, although in reality this gave him the scope to moan about a huge range of things he thought were wrong with society. [16] First delivered in 1781, the only legitimate text of Graham’s risqué lecture was printed in 1783 for an exclusively male audience (it was considered too rude for women).[17] Graham claims to have delivered his Lecture over five hundred times in London alone;[18] certainly it caused both his short-lived fame, and his eventual downfall.[19] This was the period in which his life was most controversial: dodging arrest and relying on his most scandalous material to keep himself afloat.[20]

As his notoriety grew, so did Graham’s issues with law enforcement, reflecting what critics have called the “medical marketplace.” [21]  This was a time of rising consumerism and falling royal influence.[22] Towns were overrun with “quacks” like Graham whose relentless self-promotion and exotic cures could draw people away from regular doctors. [23] The growing importance of governments meanwhile,[24] meant the gradual introduction of regulation of the environment and a crackdown on quackery.[25] Porter has argued that the use of the word “quack” was part of an attempt to label these nuisances as “other people”,[26] a phrase that could be considered interchangeable with Douglas’s “matter out of place”.[27] Looked at in this way, Graham’s trouble with the authorities fits into a larger scheme to exclude people who don’t fit the traditional medical mould. The relationship of this to Douglas’ theory about social cleansing becomes even clearer when we consider that Graham had actually just been arrested for what we would refer to in the modern day as “talking dirty”: publishing “Lascivious and Indecent Advertisements” and “Wanton and Improper Lectures,” both having been labelled inappropriate for public consumption.[28]

Graham, however, was no weak opponent. He was a wily wordsmith who knew how to manipulate public opinion. In the preface to his Lecture, in which he insults the newspapers and law-makers trying to get rid of him, Graham uses the idea of dirt as “matter out of place” to reverse their positions in society.[29] He begins by arguing that if they think his work is filth, it’s their fault for being dirty-minded: “Weak, superficial, sour, ignorant, affected and illiberal persons, who are not conversant with the works and workings of nature […] find it exceptionable” whereas the wise reader will “clearly perceive” that it aims to “dissuade men and women from vices.”[30] Graham takes the alleged difference between what he sees as the corrupt medical authorities and his idealised readers even further, by besmearing the bodies of his enemies with the language of filth. This attack culminates in the image of:

The hoggish glutton […] remarkable for wallowing in sensuality, and for making himself and others worse than brutes, by gross and excessive eating and drinking […] these are the men who are GENERALLY chosen into the magistracy of your vile, gutling and guzzling corporation towns.[31]

In the eighteenth-century, the dirty animal was a symbol of immorality, especially the pig. Being labelled as “unclean” in the Bible had already disadvantaged these smelly creatures, and during this period they had a reputation for sniffing around the city streets and eating rubbish.[32] In their defence, Graham acknowledges that even the “hog rooting… in the dunghill, want no other than the senses which God and Nature hath given them, to discover both their most salutary food in health, and their most effectual physic in sickness.”[33] The “hoggish glutton” is far worse than this, growing fat from the immorality of modern society.[34] Graham’s image of the dirty pig is a caricature of posh doctors, who he believed invented “vague and conjectural hypotheses and theories” instead of focusing on the natural world.[35] Seen from this angle, Graham’s portrait of towns is as a dunghill of vices, a key source of disarray which “undermined public health, attracting flies, vermin and swine.”[36] Alongside the “hoggish” magistrates are the “carrion flies” of the press, who exacerbate public problems since “when they cannot find sores to feast on [… they] will make them.”[37] Graham uses the idea of “matter out of place” to improve his own image, while besmearing the authorities trying to challenge him.[38]

Figure 1. (More Pigs Than Teats, Or—The New Litter Of Hungry Grunters, Sucking John Bull’s-Old-Sow To Death 1806) More piggy politics: an early nineteenth-century satirical piece by Gillray which depicts members of the aristocracy as squealing piglets draining the mother pig of milk.

Graham uses ideas about dirt again in the body of his Lecture, when he explains the causes of infertility. His view that barrenness has to do with one’s liftestyle, caused by the luxury and sin of eighteenth-century society, correlates with the general ways people at the time thought about health. Humouralism, the idea that “the microcosm (man’s body) and the macrocosm (the cosmos)” were meant to mirror each other,[39] led to the belief that disease was a disruption of natural energy through sinful behaviour, [40] and a bad society disruption by deviant people.[41] Graham again uses unpleasant imagery to get across this point. Throughout his works, he describes nature as a “wondrous and capacious womb,”[42] whereas its destruction through culture is a work of “man-midwifery,” an “untimely…abortion.” [43] Graham’s theory ties the misbehaving body to troubles in society, and then troubles in society to those people he believes contaminate it. This is made clear in some of Graham’s plans to treat infertility. Graham encourages medical intervention and even prefigures negative eugenics by suggesting that degenerates – the “matter out of place” of society[44] – undergo “a certain operation” to stop them reproducing.[45] This approach is justified by the argument that these people are “contaminated with the rooted seeds of diseases,”[46] drawing on Douglas’s suggestion that, in the public imagination, deviants have the power to pollute the rest of society.[47] Ideas about dirt and pollution aren’t just a strategy that Graham uses to promote himself, but actually form the basis of his medical beliefs

Adam and Eve, and the Freedom to Conceive

After discussing society, Graham gets down to the nitty gritty of the human body, explaining to his audience how he believes babies are made. Procreation is really important to Graham because it is the opposite of barrenness, which as we know he believed was the result of a sinful society.

This fits in with Smith’s historical analysis, which shows that fertility has historically been associated with purity.[48] However, Graham’s promotion of sex and babies as clean and natural, by contrast with the dirt and degeneration which causes infertility, is pretty problematic by eighteenth-century standards. As John Wesley wrote in Primitive Physic (1747), before mankind’s Fall:

there was no place for physic […] he knew no sin, so he knew no pain, no sickness, weakness, or bodily disorder […] But since man rebelled […] seeds of weakness and pain, of sickness and death, are now lodged in our inmost substance; whence a thousand disorders continually spring, even without the aid of external violence.[49]

What Wesley is saying here is that the Original Sin of Adam and Eve, which cursed humankind with morality and diseases, is passed down through the generations by man’s sperm, a view which people had begun to have after the discovery of semen by Leeuwenhoek during the Renaissance.[50] This is a dangerous principle for Graham, who in a typically male way thought that semen was the root of all beauty, goodness, and health.[51] As a matter of fact, the language he uses to describe this “vivifying, luminous principle,” mirrors that which describes the Holy Spirit in the Bible.[52] Otto argues that Graham’s attempt to “spiritualise material forces” is used to construct an “ideal” sexual body.[53] Applying Douglas’s suggestion that human instinct is to get rid of “matter out of place” by “purifying, demarcating and punishing transgressions,” we can see how Graham adapts his arguments about how Original Sin is passed down through conception to fit in with his belief that sperm is perfect:

The complete future child […] actually subsists in a dormant or inanimate state in the ovarium of the mother […] in all its parts, long before the commerce between the sexes;- and that what is styled the act of generation, is only the means intended by nature, […] to set the little animal machine a going[54]

As this quote shows, Graham had the opposite view to Wesley. He claims that the “ovist” model of preformation is correct: the belief that a little human already exists inside each egg before it is fertilised.[55] In her work on the history of the preformation movement, Pinto-Correia shows the continuity between the religious views of key figures and their views on preformation.[56] In this case, Graham’s religious views help to support his scientific principles, because the ovist argument asserted that it was women who pass on original sin as they alone produced and formed children.[57] Graham’s description protects sex as well as sperm from being sinful, because his theory of conception mirrors Mary’s impregnation by the Holy Spirit, which preserved her chastity,[58] occurring “before the commerce between the sexes.”[59] Whilst the theory of sperm as the vehicle of original sin represents physical “matter out of place,” and an imbalance of the human body with the perfection of nature,[60] Graham suggests that original sin is not the product of generation, but already exists inside the woman’s body.[61]

James Graham’s Celestial Bed

Graham envisages the fallen state physically, in order to reinforce his earlier link between sin and society. As God sculpted every human at the moment of creation, all “men and women that have been […] or that ever will be” were contained in Eve’s body.[62] This presents an explanation of “the great and gradual degeneracy and diminution of the human race! In their bodily and mental faculties” which is at once religious and biological, because each generation “is necessarily smaller […] than that which incloses it.”[63] Like Wesley, Graham believes that “there was no place for physic” before the Fall.[64]

However, by formulating the disease this way, Graham changes Wesley’s account of its cause from “inmost substance” to “external violence.”[65] This change fits in perfectly with Graham’s earlier suggestion that those who “come into the world contaminated with the rooted seeds of diseases, from the vices, from the follies, or from the misfortunes of their progenitors […] ought not to marry.”[66] The “rooted seeds” Graham is referring to are not inherited sin (like Wesley suggested), but rather poor lifestyle choices which are passed down to the child.[67] By presenting original sin as a biological predisposition “to diseases, horrors, putrefaction, dissolution, and premature death,” Graham avoids the imbalance that the impure human body would have with pure and fertile Nature, instead presenting it as a disease that can be cured through his medical advice.[68] Through the lens of Purity and Danger, we can understand why Graham thinks his explanation of conception is “more rational […] than any that has yet appeared,” [69] and why he thinks that his treatments allow humans to recover a “body freed from discord and disease.”[70]

STDs and Society

The third part of Graham’s lecture moves from abstract theories about how the body works toward its sweaty surfaces – arising from his discussion of STDs. It is here where Graham’s obsessive compulsive cleanliness really stands out, and serves to demonstrate how physical hygiene fits into his beliefs about society and the workings of the body. As weird as it sounds, the idea that dirt off the street could cause disease is a pretty modern concept: people in the eighteenth century didn’t care for the five-second-rule, and they didn’t feel a particular need to wash their bodies free of dirt very regularly. Most of the people in England who washed regularly in fact only did so to demonstrate that they could afford to.[71] In fact, whilst cold water bathing was becoming a prominent medical cure, [72] most people believed that washing regularly was a risky business.[73]

Graham’s emphasis on daily hygiene is unparalleled in England during the period.[74] Whilst many doctors created expensive lotions and potions designed to polish unconcealed parts of the body,[75] Graham’s advice isn’t motivated by money:[76] the hygiene treatment he talks about the most is “very cold water.”[77] Furthermore, whilst he encourages cleaning of those visible parts, the “face” and “hands,” he is far more concerned with “the genitalia and fundament.”[78] Graham is obsessed with cold water cleansing because it promotes “Cold balmy corrugate firmness.”[79] This idea stems from the Paracelsian theory that “the body attracts nourishment to itself” through the skin.[80] Since the Middle Ages, this belief made bathing unpopular, because people thought that it helped diseases to enter the body.[81] However, in late eighteenth-century France, it was theorised that the hardening effect water had on skin, reflected the way that absorbed water worked inside the body.[82] The way water interacts with the “permeable” body is incredibly important in Graham’s discussion of venereal disease:[83]

If there be but the least mucus, filth, or slime adhering to or upon the genital parts at the time of carnal copulation, it will act as a magnet or a nest, to attract and to lodge, the venereal virus or animalculae, from whence they will fasten like a curse, more tenacious than an Aegyptian plague.[84]

Again, we see again the eighteenth-century association of moral impurity with disease.[85] In this case, the connection seemed obvious because it was physical; infections like syphilis caused facial disfigurements, making them a public symbol of the  “polluted and polluting.”[86] Here, Graham suggests that the disease is the result of sin by comparing it to an “Aegyptian plague,” the Biblical punishment unleashed on the Pharoah in Exodus.[87] However, here Graham is less concerned with changing society and more concerned with keeping the body clean, showing that the idea of “matter out of place” remains the most effective way of understanding all of his medical ideas.[88]

Graham encourages cold water before the sexual act to create “firmness,” presenting the clean genitals as a boundary which the virus cannot penetrate.[89] The purpose of cold water is to bolster the body not morally but literally, keeping out the plague which threatens it rather than counteracting the vice. While “COLD water” is recommended by Graham before sex, “WARM water,”[90] associated with luxury,[91] is recommended afterwards. He even writes (get ready for this) that “these mild fluids […] may then be injected into the urethra with a syringe again and again.”[92] While the rest of Graham’s lecture has encouraged sex, here “carnal copulation” becomes dangerous, because it might allow dirt to enter the body.[93] Graham’s form of control, which uses water to reinforce the leaky body and thus preserve its purity, mirrors increasing public health measures such as partitioning of the dead within cities to prevent epidemics,[94] supporting Otto’s argument that when it comes to sex acts, Graham is more concerned by bodily rather than moral repercussions.[95]

The future Lady Hamilton posing as Hygeia, goddess of health, at Dr James Graham’s Temple of Aesculapius

Like the medical marketplace described in the Lecture’s preface, Graham treats everything outside of the system (in this case, the body), as “matter out of place” which threatens health.[96] This impulse underlies Graham’s key piece of medical advice: “BATHING THEIR PRIVATE PARTS WITH COLD WATER THOROUGHLY! AND FOR A LONG WHILE, EVERY NIGHT AND MORNING, FROM THE FIRST MOMENT OF THEIR LIFE TO THE LAST HOUR OF THEIR EXISTENCE.”[97] Graham’s use of the quantifiers “EVERY,” “FROM” and “TO,” give his command the ritualistic nature which Douglas associates with religion.[98] Indeed, Graham prophesises that:

Thus shall your children and their children […] be strong, rosy, ever-blooming. There will be no such diseases known and convulsions, rickets, heats […] Let these great truths therefore, be written in golden letters in every room, and imprinted in indelible characters on the mind of every man and of every woman![99]

Cleanliness has become a religion to Graham. His reference to “golden letters in every room,”[100] alludes to Jesus’s “Golden Rule,” called thus because the Roman Emperor Severus signalled his devotion for Him by embossing it in gold across his walls.[101] Even though Graham is sceptical about mainstream medicine and resentful of the way he is excluded, he ironically ends up applying the same principles to his own medical beliefs. The potential of water to strengthen is used by Graham as a force for regulation of what comes in and out of the body. His belief in the power of his own medical practices ultimately stems from the opposition of purity and danger, the idea that dirt is always destructive, and the desire to keep order.

Documenting Graham’s first taste of success, his biographer Syson comments that:

His aspirations were born of a sensation of power and control. In this uncertain world, where disease swirled insensibly in every crowded assembly room […] where weakness bred weakness […] Dr Graham believed he had found a way to organise the very elements.[102]

Syson is here referring to Graham’s electrical equipment and his almost continuous use of nitrous oxide (laughing gas), which was, no doubt, behind his later belief that he was a reincarnation of Jesus and his attempts to live as a plant (yes, you read that right).[103] Nevertheless, I’ve tried to show that there’s something behind Graham’s eccentric beliefs that motivates us all to a certain extent: fears about hygiene and dirt. Douglas’s ideas in Purity and Danger have helped me to show that these ideas underpinned Graham’s attitudes towards society and his medical treatments, adding to a growing consensus that medicine, and even society itself, is more driven by “pollution fears” than we might like to believe. [104]

[1] Norfolk Record Office, MC7/16 395×2

[2] Roy Porter, “The Sexual Politics of James Graham”, British Journal for Eighteenth Century Studies, Vol. 5, No. 2 (1982), 199-206:199.

[3] Ibid. 201-206

[4] James Graham, A Lecture on the Generation, Increase, and Improvement of the Human Species!…of country just-asses, mares, Alderwomen, and Whippers-In!… (London 1783), microfilm, reel 11755:3, Raymond Burton Library, The University of York, York: image 20

[5] Lydia Syson, Doctor of Love: James Graham and His Celestial Bed, (Richmond: Alma

Books, 2012): 6; Peter Otto, “James Graham as Spiritual Libertine”, Libertine Enlightenment: Sex,

Liberty, and Licence in the Eighteenth Century, eds. L. O’Connell and P. Cryle (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004), 204-221: 206

[6] James Graham, A lecture on the generation, increase, and improvement of the human

species! Interspersed with precepts for the preservation and exaltation of personal beauty and loveliness; and For prolonging Human Life, Healthily and Happily, To the very longest possible Period of Human Existence!…The whole illustrated and embellished with A just and spirited Review of the Candour of News-Paper doers; of the present Professors and Administrations of Politics, Law, Physic, and Divinity; and with a Naked Exhibition of Asses, stripped of their Ermine, namely, of country just-asses, Mares, Alderwomen, and Whippers-In! By James Graham, M.D. President of the Council of Health!-Sole Proprietor, and principal Director of the Temple of Health! in Pall-Mall, near the King’s-Palace, (London, 1783), Eighteenth Century Collections Online: http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3309608678&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0, microfilm, image 20

[7] Robert Willan, Miscellaneous works of the late Robert Willan: Comprising An inquiry into the antiquity of the small-pox, measles, and scarlet fever, now first published: Reports on the diseases in London, a new edition: and detached papers on medical subjects, collected from various periodical publications, ed. Ashby Smith (London: T Cadell, 1821): 391

[8] Syson, Doctor of Love: 209

[9] Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger: an Analysis of Concept of Pollution and Taboo (London: Routledge, 2002): 2

[10] Ibid. 44

[11] Ibid. 3, 2.

[12] Dave Mosher and Skye Gould, “How likely are foreign terrorists to kill Americans? The odds may surprise you”, Business Insider 31st January 2017. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.businessinsider.com/death-risk-statistics-terrorism-disease-accidents-2017-1

[13] There’s some really interesting stuff on this. See Virginia Smith, “Physical Puritanism” 172-96; Charles Rosenberg, “Florence Nightingale on Contagion: The Hospital as Moral Universe” in Explaining Epidemics and Other Studies in the History of Medicine, ed. Charles Rosenberg (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992): 90-108; Mark Jenner “The Politics of London Air: John Evelyn’s Fumifugium and the Restoration,” Historical Journal, Vol. 38, No. 3 (1995): 535-551; Cyrus Mody “A Little Dirt Never Hurt Anyone: Knowledge-Making and Contamination in Materials Science”, Social Studies of Science, Vol. 31, No.1 (2001): 7-36

[14] Syson, Doctor of Love: 197

[15] Thomas Short, A comparative history of the increase and decrease of mankind in England, and several countries abroad…To which is added, a syllabus of the general states of health, air, seasons, and food for the last three hundred years; and also a meteorological discourse. By Thomas Short, M.D. (London 1767), Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3302336798&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0 (London 1767), microfilm, image 16.

[16] Graham, Lecture, image 7, 9

[17] Syson, Doctor of Love: 210

[18] Graham, Lecture, image 3

[19] Syson, Doctor of Love: 218

[20] Ibid. 218

[21] Mark Jenner and Patrick Wallis, “The Medical Marketplace” in Medicine and the Market in England and Its Colonies, c.1450-c.1850, ed. Mark Jenner and Patrick Wallis (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007): 1

[22]Ibid. 3; Jürgen Habermas, The Structural Transformation of the Public Sphere: An Inquiry Into a Category of Bourgeois Society (Cambridge: Polity Press, 1989): 3

[23] Jenner and Wallis, “The Medical Marketplace”: 7; Porter, Health for Sale: 17, vii.

[24] Dorothy Porter, Health, Civilisation and the State: A History of Public Health from Ancient to Modern Times (London: Routledge, 1995): 45

[25] Dorothy Porter, Health, Civilisation and the State: 53

[26] Porter, Health for Sale: 1

[27] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44; Porter, Health for Sale: 1

[28] Edinburgh Tollbooth Records, Publishing lascivious…within the city,  HH21/21, Edinburgh, f.197v.

[29] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[30] Graham, Lecture, image 4

[31]Ibid. image 6

[32] Lev. 11:7; Emily Cockayne, Hubbub: Filth, Noise, & Stench in England: 1600-1770, (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2008): 39

[33] James Graham, A new, plain, and rational treatise on the true nature and uses of the Bath waters: shewing the cases and constitutions in which these waters are really proper to be used…under the immediate ocular Inspection, and attested by th[e] Hand-Writing of several of the principal Nobility of Europe and some great cures performed at Bath. By James Graham, M.D. Of Edinburgh, but now at Bath (Bath 1789). Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3317183201&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0, microfilm, image 22

[34] Graham, Lecture, image 6

[35] James Graham, A new and curious treatise of the nature and effects of simple earth, water, and air,

when applied to the human body…By James Graham, M. D. Formerly sole Institutor, Proprietor, and Director of the Temple of Health in the Adelphi, and in Pall-Mall, London. (London, 1793). Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3308273411&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0. image 6

[36] Emily Cockayne, Hubbub: Filth, Noise, & Stench in England: 1600-1770. (New Haven

(Conn.): Yale University Press, 2008): 192

[37] Graham, Lecture, image 5

[38] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[39] Lauren Kassell, “Magic, Alchemy and the Medical Economy in Early Modern England: The Case of Robert Fludd’s Magnetical Medicine”, Medicine and the Market in England and Its Colonies, c. 1450- c.1850, eds. Mark Jenner and Patrick Wallis (Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007): 89

[40] Porter, Health for Sale: 156

[41] Cockayne, Hubbub: 235

[42] James Graham, A short treatise on the all-cleansing, – all-healing, – and all-invigorating qualities of the simple earth, When long and repeatedly applied to the naked Human-Body and Lungs, for the safe, speedy, and radical Cure of all Diseases…And of the best Methods of conducting this most essicacious, and most salutary Practice of Earth-Bathing; And a free Critique on the regular Professors or Teachers, and Practisers of Medicine, Surgery, &c. Being the first Book or Pamphlet that ever was published in the World on the Subject of Earth-Bathing. By James Graham, M. D. (London, 1790) Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3308610340&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0, microfilm, image 5

[43] Graham, Bath Waters, image 14

[44] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[45] Graham, Lecture, image 12

[46] Ibid. Image 11

[47] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 3

[48] Virginia Smith, Clean: A History of Personal Hygiene and Purity, (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2007): 33

[49] John Wesley. Primitive physick: or, an easy and natural method of curing most diseases (London 1772) Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&docLevel=FASCIMILE&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW3309076647&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0, microfilm, image 2-3

[50] David Jones. Soul of the Embryo: Christianity and the Human Embryo (London: A&C

Black, 2004): 142

[51] Graham, Lecture, image 16

[52] Graham, Lecture, image 16; John 6:63

[53] Ibid.

[54] Graham, Lecture, image 13-14

[55] Clara Pinto-Correia, The Ovary of Eve: Egg and Sperm and Preformation, (London:

University of Chicago Press, 1998): 47, 53

[56] Ibid. 14

[57] Jones, Soul of the Embryo: 168

[58] 1 Luke. 11:35

[59] Graham, Lecture: 14

[60] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[61] Collosians 2:9

[62] Graham, Lecture, image 14

[63] Ibid.

[64] Wesley, Primitive Physick, image 3

[65] Ibid.

[66] Graham, Lecture, image 11

[67] Ibid.

[68] Ibid.

[69] Ibid., image 12

[70] James Graham, A sketch: or, short description of Dr. Graham’s medical apparatus, &c. erected About the Beginning of the Year 1780, in his house, on the Royal Terrace, Adelphi, London (London, 1780), Eighteenth Century Collections Online. http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=uniyork&tabID=T001&docId=CW108588790&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0&docLevel=FASCIMILE, microfilm, image 80

[71] Smith, Clean: A History of Personal Hygiene and Purity (Oxford: Oxford University Press,

2007): 227

[72] Ibid. 239

[73] Georges Vigarello, Concepts of Cleanliness: Changing Attitudes in France Since the Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988): 96

[74] Syson, Doctor of Love: 209

[75] Porter, Health for Sale: 115

[76] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[77] Ibid. 18

[78] Ibid.

[79] Ibid.

[80] Graham, Nature and Effects, image 11

[81] Georges Vigarello, Concepts of Cleanliness: Changing Attitudes in France Since the

Middle Ages (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988): 9

[82] Ibid. 112

[83] Vigarello, Concepts of Cleanliness: 8

[84] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[85] Silvia De Renzi, “Policies of Health: Diseases, Poverty and Hospitals”, The Healing Art: Health, Disease and Society in Europe 1500-1800, ed. Peter Elmer (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2005): 139

[86] Sander Gilman, Making the Body Beautiful: A Cultural History of Aesthetic Surgery  (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1999): 68

[87] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[88] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[89] Graham, Lecture, image 18

[90] Graham, Lecture, image 19; Exodus 8:24

[91] Vigarello, Concepts of Cleanliness: 117

[92] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[93] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[94] Foucault, “Social Medicine”: 147

[95] Otto, “Spiritual Libertine”: 214

[96] Douglas, Purity and Danger: 44

[97] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[98] Ibid.

[99] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[100] Graham, Lecture, image 19

[101] Richard Thomas France, The Gospel of Matthew (Cambridge: William B. Eerdman’s Publishing Company, 2007): 284

[102] Syson, Doctor of Love: 160

[103] Ibid.

[104] Smith, “Physical Puritanism”: 175