A Boy's Childhood in Cologne, c. 1810 (Retrospective Account)

page 3 of 8    print version    return to list

previous document      next document

Childhood years.

[ . . . ] Even for the lowliest of citizens, a large family is a blessing; any increase of it is a joy; not without reason, the resident of Cologne says, “Many children, many slices of bread, but also many Lord’s Prayers!” [ . . . ] During the first days, people inquire how the woman in childbed and the newborn are doing. Then the visits begin, and along with them the admiring of the infant, how heavy it is, how strong. If it is a boy, he is “a spitting image of his father,” if a girl, of the mother.

The new member of the human race always gains something for the siblings: ‘Sugar goods’ [i.e. candy], sponge, spicy Christmas cookies, and similar children’s blisses. When well-to-do women give birth, the children of the immediate neighborhood are pleased with the delicacies that the new arrival has ‘brought in his or her diapers.’

An important business is the choice of the godfather and godmother, the “Patt” and “Jot.” The result of a family council even among the more prosperous classes, one usually kept this office in the family circle. The lower classes regarded the choice of godparents as a speculative transaction, approaching richer citizens to assume the office of godparent. The true native of Cologne deemed it a sin to turn down this request, and even though one had someone else, a so-called ‘Aaschjevatter,’ stand in at the baptism, a gift from the godparent never lacks, and if circumstances necessitate, the godparent never forgets his or her duty to act as a substitute for the parents. According to common opinion, the child took up the character of its godparent. [ . . . ]

Above all, the infant was protected from air and wind, kept quite warm at all times, especially the head, which day and night did not go without the snug flannel or calico cap, the so-called ‘Ging,’ over which is worn an additional decorative bonnet. Scurf and bad eyes were the results of this ‘packaging system.’ Much, much more significant than today was also the mortality among children. [ . . . ]