‘An elegant and able practitioner’. Marian Mason and the rise of women’s calisthenics in nineteenth century Britain

ABSTRACT

In 1826 Marian Mason was introduced to British society as a callisthenic instructor. Trained by P.H. Clias, a gymnast who oversaw physical training in the military and navy, Mason is the first high profile female fitness coach in British history. Despite her importance as a landmark figure, Mason's contributions, and indeed life, remain relatively obscured from the historical record. Studying Mason's heyday in public life from 1826 to the early 1830s, this article provides the first substantive examination of Mason's life, her social networks and wealth and, critically, the monograph she published in 1826. While acknowledging Mason's role as an early female fitness coach, the article provides a deep reading of Mason's successes, focusing on her class and relationship advantages, her ability to court medical favour and shrewdness in addressing broader societal concerns. This article is less a biography and more an examination of the broader social and medical trends in early nineteenth century England, which created a space for people like Mason. The article presents a simple argument – Marian Mason was an early female fitness coach who, drawing on broader societal concerns about the body, created a niche for her career by leveraging her expertise and familial connections.

KEYWORDS:

• Gymnastics
• England
• nineteenth century
• callisthenics
• physical activity
• gender history

Built in 1806 and then redesigned in 1818, the Argyll Rooms on London’s Regent Street¹ was known as a hotspot for London’s high society. It was there that masquerades, concerts and other entertainments were hosted. Supported by subscriptions from members, it was a decidedly monied place and one home to many firsts within English society. It was at the Argyll Rooms that famed musicians Ludwig Spohr, Franz Liszt and Felix Mendelssohn were first introduced to England. Likewise, Beethoven’s Symphony No. 9 debuted at the Rooms. Though often a point of satire within the broader press, the Rooms held a certain cache among a narrow group of people and those who reported on it.² While it is incorrect to say that the Rooms were an unbridled success, a place of trend setting and iconoclastic arts (their closure following a fire in 1830 being proof of such), they nevertheless held an elevated status. Among the balls, the concerts, and the artistic displays in 1826 was a callisthenic demonstration from Captain P.H. Clias and his pupil, Marian Mason. Mason and Clias were the only two instructors to ever demonstrate their systems at the Rooms and their impact was keenly felt by educationalists and physicians.

Born in America but immigrating to Switzerland, where he spent several years teaching Gymnastics, Clias arrived in London in 1822. Hired as a superintendent of physical training at the Royal Military and Naval Academies, Clias was something of an oddity within British society. He was the first high-profile physical educationalist in England and certainly the first well known trainer of British troops in this way. Clias’ name was a regular appearance in English newspapers not least because he used his time with the military and navy to concurrently run his own private exercise classes for the upper-class, publish several monographs and medical articles, and host private demonstrations of his gymnastic system.³ It was not until the 1860s when Scottish physical educationalist and military trainer Archibald Maclaren instituted a new military training system that a military instructor gained a significant amount of media attention.⁴ Described by some contemporary journalists as possessing the perfect body, Clias trained men and women of all ages in his private gymnasium in No. 26, St. James’s Street in London. From 1822 until he returned to mainland Europe in c. 1826, Clias was highly sought after for his expertise and nous. Yet despite publishing a warmly received monograph on gymnastics in 1823, which went through four editions in short successions, Clias did not leave a legacy in England. He did not train a wide array of others as coaches for his system and, popular though it was, was soon overtaken by other works. Retrospective works on Clias, such as those by Fred Eugene Leonard, and others have credited him as an excellent coach but someone borrowed from others’ systems, as opposed to creating his own revolutionary approach.⁵

The exception to this was Marian Mason, the sole individual trained by P.H. Clias in England to be a coach. Announced at the Argyll Rooms, Mason joined Clias for a gymnastic demonstration at the Rooms in April 1826.⁶ She was soon invited back for another display to appease those who missed the first iteration.⁷ Within the next three years, Mason produced a book on gymnastics – being the first woman to do so in Britain – established a popular and profitable gymnastics school and, unlike Clias, trained several others in her system. Mason’s career faded by the 1830s when she disappeared from public life but her career is nevertheless illustrative of both the discourses surrounding women’s bodies, the pathways to the profession for women and the money available to some fitness coaches during this time. Mason had advantages that others didn’t as she was born into a gymnastic family, and it appears that she had secured sponsors prior to her Argyll appearance. Mason’s father, Joseph, was for many years, the dance, gymnastics, and comportment instructor for the Royal Family.⁸ The Mason family’s reputation contained within it so much capital, that Mason and her brother, Joseph, both enjoyed careers as gymnastic instructors.⁹ Marian had access to worlds that others didn’t, which included trips to Paris to train under dancing and deportment experts.¹⁰ The purpose of this article is to tease out Mason’s significance and place within the broader development of women’s coaching and physical culture.

Histories of fitness coaches are multiple, with many critical pieces on pioneering figures such as Friedrich Ludwig Jahn, P.H. Ling and other well know figures.¹¹ Less information exists on those who operated at a more modest level: those coaches who ran exercise classes, published books and enjoyed moderate successes but without the lasting or transformative legacy of others. There is a value in studying other kinds of coaches as they often operated in the wake of these pioneering individuals and, truthfully, were in far greater supply than iconoclastic thinkers. Marian Mason was one such ‘normal’ instructor who, drawing on broader societal concerns about the body, created a niche for her own career. She did this by, leveraging her own expertise and familial connections. To understand how Mason could tap into broader concerns, an obvious starting point is the training and coaching climate of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century. This encompasses the first section. Following this, the article examines Mason’s entry into the world of coaching and, critically, her early successes. While Mason’s public career was relatively short compared to her male counterparts it was, nonetheless, significant. Hence the third, and final, section studies Mason’s career and her legacy within this space.

Posture and poise

Training bodies in eighteenth and nineteenth century Europe

To understand Mason’s career and, at one point, profile, it is necessary to discuss the general training climate of the age. During the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century, physical training, and gymnastics, grew in its scope, and its reputation. More individuals were able to earn a living as instructors; institutions such as schools and militaries began to introduce military training; and physicians began to take a much deeper interest in exercise as medicine. Taken together, such changes were the result of emerging philosophical and educational trends. In particular, the work of French philosopher Jean Jacque Rousseau, provided a great moral impetus for the need to include physical exercise in children’s overall educational development. Indeed, Jan Todd and others have noted Rousseau as particularly important and, indeed, it is difficult to find a gymnastics or physical training tract from the period after Rousseau’s Emile was published in 1763, which does not borrow from its message.¹² Tracing the story of a fictitious boy named Emile, the five-volume tale presents an argument for education which blends physical and mental training together in the quest to build a holistic man. Book V of Emile discussed Emile’s eventual bride Sophie and her education. Driven by Rousseau’s belief that women should be ‘passive and weak’ compared to men, it advocated some physical activity but not too much. Whereas Emile exercised to strengthen his body and prowess, Sophie was advised to exercise to maintain her beauty for Emile.¹³ These distinctions are important because they appeared ad nauseum in subsequent training texts. Rousseau’s Emile was equally influential for its absences. Danièle Tosato-Rigo’s study of Emile explored the near complete absence of physicians and doctors from the text. Contextualising this with reference to a broader dispute between physicians and gymnastic/callisthenic instructors during the eighteenth-century, Tosato-Rigo considered this absence a deliberate slight against a medical profession Rousseau deemed wanting when it came to individual health.¹⁴

Yet, as Alun Withey’s work on deformity in the eighteenth-century stressed, some physicians had strongly come around to the idea that exercise could be used as cure.¹⁵ The growing European interest in physical education and gymnastics was, in part, also motivated by a new medical interest in using exercise as medicine and/or as a preventative for illness. While admittedly many European, and especially British, physicians became concerned with ‘deformities’ in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century that were relatively mild – for example, stooped shoulders, concaved chests, and poor posture – some of their solutions were innovative and relied heavily on a new growing economy of exercise equipment. Some used more dubious steel devices, including steel corsets, but others began to promote, or dabble with, physical exercise equipment.¹⁶ Perhaps the best example of this was French physician Nicolas Andry, a critical figure in the development of orthopaedics, who, in 1744 recommended the swinging of wooden clubs around the body to improve health outcomes or, to use the language of the era, to address ‘deformities’.¹⁷ Many gymnastic instructors of the early nineteenth century worked alongside, or fashioned themselves, as physicians. P.H. Clias, the man who trained Mason to be a coach, published a paper entitled ‘Application of Gymnastics to the Treatment of Disease’ in the London Medical and Physical Journal in 1824.¹⁸

Also critically important in deepening the space for gymnastics and physical activity in European society was an explosion of interest in gymnastics in the wake of the Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815). Fit, agile, and capable of traversing large distances in short periods, the strength and mobility of French troops during this period inspired many individuals in French occupied countries to take to physical training. One such example was Prussian instructor Friedrich Ludwig Jahn who established his Turnverein gymnastics movement following Prussia’s humiliating loss to France. In 1811 he established his first gymnasium and from there his system flourished inside and outside of Prussia’s borders. By 1825 Turner instructors were established across Europe and the United States.¹⁹ The militarisation of gymnastics came at a time when individual schools around Europe were beginning to institutionalise some from of physical education. The converging of educational and military worlds around movement furthered opportunities for a growing band of physical instructors who proved open and enthusiastic to moving across Europe for work.

P.H. Clias, for example, moved from the United States, to Switzerland, to England, and then to France. A contemporary, Monsieur Beaujeu, moved from France, to Spain, to England, and then to Ireland.²⁰ Others moved across Europe, such as Francisco Amorós y Ondeano who moved from Spain to France.²¹ There was also the case of Monsieur Huguenin, who moved from France to Ireland and then to England. Such individuals often wrote gymnastic texts where they referenced the trends outlined above ranging from Rousseau to deformities and everything in between.²² Many, as Leonard argued, created their own systems, or used specialised equipment unique to them. Others, including Clias, synthesised the work of others and relied more so on their coaching abilities.²³ Mason fell into this latter camp as she tended to promote others’ systems rather than her own. Rather than detailing the prevailing gymnastic systems during this period in great detail, a brief word on women’s physical training is needed.

One of the few texts to study women’s calisthenics and gymnastics in Britain during this period, by Jan Todd, divided women’s training into two distinct schools of thought. The first, which Todd aptly named, the baby-faced doll school of thought, advocated for women’s exercise, but one which was not too strenuous or taxing for women.²⁴ This, heavily Rousseauian, approach, had embedded within it the idea that women were physically weaker than men and should be treated as such.

A niche, but still existent, school of thought was one Todd labelled as the ‘vibrant womanhood’ approach.²⁵ Practitioners of this school, one of whom Todd cited as Clias, were more verbose in their promotion of women’s exercise.²⁶ In some instances, they advocated for the use of more challenging exercises but, typically, their manner of writing about women and their need for exercise was more bombastic and ambitious than the other. Did this mean that the motivations behind the two schools differed? Not particularly. The main rallying cries for physical activity for women centred on woman as mother, partner, or fragile body. Primary motivations, as written by male practitioners and physicians, were to make women healthier for childbirth, to make them more attractive to male partners, and, finally, to prevent nervous disorders – oft thought caused by excessive study – or deformities. Enforcing a broader gender order within Victorian society, which depicted men as the physical and intellectual superiors over women, such motivations were nevertheless significant for Mason as they provided an opening for her businesses and a respectability for her efforts.²⁷ The rest of this Chapter focuses on Mason’s navigation of these worlds.

Entering the marketplace

Mason’s early career

Returning to 14 April 1826, when Mason first performed at the Argyll Rooms, two points are now clear. First, that the interest in her debut was the result of a much boarder interest in physical education as outlined in the previous section and two that Mason’s initially strong reputation was the result of her social connections. As reported by the Morning Post, she appeared before the audience – her ‘introduction to the Fashionable World’ – having already secured the patronage of the Duchess of Wellington and Lady Noel Byron. As an aside, it has proven impossible to discover how Mason first received the Duchess and Lady’s patronage although one suspects that her father’s previous role as a dance instructor for the Royal Family likely facilitated these kinds of connections.²⁸ To the sound of accompanying music, Mason ‘went through her allotted duties with the greatest precision, elegance and delicacy’. In the audience were ‘medical characters and Royal Academicians’ who had been attracted by Clias’ advertising of the event. Mason was presented as the only woman coached by Clias to train others and was ‘to remain exclusively entitled to that privilege’.²⁹ Given that Clias’ public exhibitions were met with reports that he possessed the most perfect body reporters had ever seen, the interest in Mason was perhaps unavoidable. Mason’s demonstrations were well received to the point that she was invited back for more demonstrations. Indeed, the Morning Herald reported in April that Mason was saddened to learn that not all of the ‘nobility and gentry’ present were able to view the demonstration. Happily Mason was afforded the larger room for her next appearance.³⁰

On 8 May 1826, the Morning Post reported on Mason’s second exhibition at the Argyll Rooms. This time she was unaccompanied and, critically, no mention was made of Clias. While their relationship was often commented upon, and indeed she marketed herself as Clias’ only female instructor, the advertising of her second exhibition suggested, to a certain extent, that she was taken on her own credentials.³¹ This was undoubtedly helped by the medical approval Mason received almost immediately upon her public career. As reported in New Monthly Magazine, the famed anatomist and surgeon, Sir Astley Cooper, physiologist and surgeon Sir Benjamin Brodie, and surgeon Benjamin Travers, as well as ‘other leading members of the profession’ had attended Mason’s performances.³² Their interest stemmed from a broader medicalisation of women’s strength and physiology which depicted the female body in need of direct intervention. The New Monthly Magazine dutifully reminded readers of this biological imperative

It is an admitted physiological fact, that imperfections in the female form have their origin for the most part in defective or irregular muscular action. The muscular exercises recommended [Mason’s system] … Are such are calculated to cure deformities of the figure, whilst they tend at the same time to invigorate the system, and conduce to elegant deportment.³³

Patricia Vertinsky’s 1990 book, The Eternally Wounded Woman, remains the canonical text on women’s training and the role nineteenth-century physicians played in shaping medical discourses around ‘correct’ kinds of exercise for women, a great deal more work needs to be done on the medicalisation of exercise during this period. Medical endorsements for Mason's training system served two purposes. They helped to present it as safe to use, but even more importantly, as something that was respectable from both a medical, and a social, standpoint. Mason’s system was likewise marketed as Calisthenic, a word which had not yet become commonplace in the English dialect. Indeed, a common occurrence was for reports to include an asterisk beside the word followed by the explanation that it derived meaning from the Greek words for beauty and strength.³⁴ Elsewhere Jan Todd’s work on Victorian interest in Greco-Roman culture has highlighted the immense capital that allusions to Greco-Roman antiquity had within fitness cultures. Much in the same way that the sporting revolution in Victorian Britain was buttressed by the Latin idiom mens sana in corpore sano, those promoting fitness regimens often utilised some connection with antiquity.³⁵

On early coverage of Mason, it is also worth noting that her story was not confined to London as snippets of her performances travelled around England and were republished within American medical journals.³⁶ Some of this coverage stemmed from her familial connection – as happened when the Exeter Flying Post reported on Mason before reminding readers of her brother, Joseph Mason, who operated his callisthenic class in the city.³⁷ Such was the initial enthusiasm for Mason’s system that it also came under some light scrutiny courtesy The Ass which referred to Mason’s system solely as ‘The Wooden Horse’, and claimed that Clias has put a ‘Miss Marion Mason up to a thing or two’. Mason’s charges were referred to as ‘pretty little creatures’.³⁸ Such comments, though presented in a pithy manner, were quite commonplace in reporting on women’s callisthenics more generally and increased in regularity during the following decade.

Safe in the patronage of Lady Byron and Duchess of Wellington, Mason produced a short monograph on physical activity and introduced her own classes at no. 3 George-street, Hanover Square in London in early 1827. The space was said to be both ‘commodious and well adapted for the purpose’ while Mason’s own carriage and demeanour were depicted as so inspiring that clients could not help themselves but change their own mannerisms.³⁹ One of the most telling comments was the idea that the ‘Callisthenic air and the Masonic gait [original emphasis] are the enviable acquirements in every fashionable drawing-room’.⁴⁰ Mason’s system was not the only to gain notoriety in this regard. Less than a decade later, Donald Walker (better known for the 1834 work British Manly Exercises) published his own book on women’s physical training and newspapers noted a similar ability to spot a woman trained using his methods simply by their manner of holding themselves.⁴¹ If one’s dedication to physical training was told by their very physique, it stood to reason that one’s ‘poor’ physique was reflective of a sloppiness in their personal habits. The physical body stood as a calling card for one’s education and access to finer resources.

In 1827 Mason published On the Utility of Exercise, a short monograph which marks her as one of the first, if not the first, female instructor to publish a text of this kind for women in Britain.⁴² While many men wrote exercise tracts, some dedicated solely to women, it was highly unusual during this period for women to write their own exercise instructions. Such was its uniqueness, that in 1890, a German physical educator republished the text entirely in German with an introduction citing Mason as a pioneering instructress.⁴³ Mason’s profile as an instructor made the book unique but the work itself is broadly like her contemporary male instructors. A common theme in exercise monographs during this period, and certainly a trope which demands further study, was the mixing of allusions to Greco-Roman appreciation of the body, the new wave of continental fitness and allusions to medical professionals who endorsed the proposed systems. What usually followed was then a dedicated section with illustrations listing various exercises and tools used during classes. Mason’s book is conspicuously missing any illustrations, or indeed descriptions whatsoever, of her system’s exercises. This can be explained away, however, with the reminder that she promoted Captain Clias’ system who, by this point, had issued three reprints of his own book, complete with illustrations, on physical activity.⁴⁴

Mason was introduced as a former pupil of Clias, and his only ‘Lady’ instructor, whose exercises were ‘approved by some of the most eminent gentlemen of the faculty in London’.⁴⁵ Acknowledging the volume of works being published during this period, Mason cited a dearth of works for women of a ‘weak constitution’ or those suffering ‘nervous debility’.⁴⁶ Dedicated to the ‘Ladies of Great Britain’, the work made no mention of Mason’s family prestige.⁴⁷ Various medical professionals were cited, as were philosophers. At that time Mason was trained solely in the use of Clias’ system which, incidentally, was a combination of bodyweight exercises and specialised equipment which allowed for more aerial exercises—think hanging with the arms overhead or swinging in the air using one's hands to initiate a movement. Clias’ equipment, such as the ‘triangle’ or the ‘cane’ was mentioned but his movements were not. The main purpose, it seems, was to advance the idea that ‘muscular motion is most agreeable’.⁴⁸ It marked an effort for Mason to synthesise what others had written and, although largely unambitious, allowed her to advance her claims to knowledge.

Clearly written with the nobility and gentry in mind, a point made obvious by the continual reference of ladies and painfully obvious when discussing the ability to exercise in the spaciousness of one’s own apartment, the monograph was well received by newspapers on publication and was advertised sporadically for the next several years. The work did not enjoy the same success that Clias’ works – which enjoyed four editions in quick succession – had. It was not republished in English (although it did enjoy some later translations), nor was it referenced widely. While it is tempting to speculate on the reasons why, it is worth focusing instead on the prestige such a publication gave to Mason, even if it did not appear to be a commercial success. The ability to refer to oneself as a published author on calisthenics allowed Mason to distinguish herself further from others operating in this period.⁴⁹ Other female instructors existed during this period, albeit with a lower profile, and often combined dancing, comportment, and gymnastic lessons in one package.⁵⁰ Mason on the other hand, could focus solely on calisthenics, at least initially. She advertised herself as an eminent expert, was endorsed by Captain Clias and patronaged by Lady Byron and the Duchess of Wellington. Such connections and adornments came in a two-year period which marked an unheralded ascension within this space. What is more, this ascension proved lucrative to Mason.

Mason’s successes and succession

One of the most difficult tasks facing historians of this period is to ascertain just how successful individual instructors were. Writing on a different period, but the same industry, Randy Roach fabulously coined the term ‘muscle, smoke and mirrors’, to characterise the rhetoric often emanating from the fitness industry.⁵¹ This is especially apt from the latter half of the twentieth century where the phrase ‘fake it till you make it’, became the mantra for many entrepreneurs whose claims about their successes were often dubious at best.⁵² In the case of Mason, historians have benefitted from a personal misfortune; Mason was robbed in 1827 by one of the servants in her house. The servant, and her partner, were caught and prosecuted later in the year. In the court documents, Mason presented herself as single, a gymnastics teacher and one of the few lodgers at Mr. Crosby’s home in Hanover Square; near, then, to where she worked.⁵³ With the knowledge that Mason never publicly stated the cost of her lessons, it is difficult to know exactly how successful she was. Thanks to the thieves, however, we know that she kept £500 in bank notes – which equates to over £40,000 at the present time when adjusted for inflation – in her bedroom drawers.⁵⁴ This was after roughly 16 months of teaching; Mason first advertised classes in March 1826 and the robbery occurred August 1827. This insight into Mason’s wealth is made more fascinating for what we don’t know about her career. We don’t know her client lists, although newspapers suggested she was contracted out to several schools as well as her own private classes.⁵⁵ Likewise, we only have snippets of her family history and potential wealth. We don’t know what she charged for her services, only that she was highly in demand. And yet, the £500 in bank notes is the clearest indication we have thus far – for both male and female instructors – of how much money could be made for a successful teacher.

Away from court cases, Mason continued to be a person of interest in 1827, and well into 1830. In December 1827, Mason was cited as ‘one of the new female Philosophers’ that the Age could praise based upon her expertise and skills.⁵⁶ Written after Mason’s book was well received, such citation gives an indication that Mason’s book, which positioned her as an expert within a transnational field spanning health and education, was influencing minds. The rhetoric around Mason in her second year as an instructor was particularly telling. Returning to the Constitution, which noted the Masonic Gait, they noted Mason’s work as effectively medical in nature.

Viewing these exercises as remedies for any imperfection in the form, originating in defective muscular action, their tendency to remove such evils is unquestionable … the combination of their advantages is peculiarly striking, as they not only occasion a powerful command of the limbs, throw open the chest and materially conduce to the establishment of health … combining the essential qualities of a corrective system with an agreeable diversion.⁵⁷

Fascinatingly, Mason also attracted further patronage during this time as the Morning Herald noted that Signor Voarino, another high-profile gymnastic instructor – although certainly not someone with the profile of a Captain Clias – had trained Mason, and only Mason, as an instructor of his system for female clients.⁵⁸ The connection with Voarino suggests that Mason was interested in adding to her knowledge but also reiterates her ability to connect with others.

Mason did not have her own patented training system but, instead, employed those created by others. While such a model would have disadvantaged a male coach, she was able to distinguish herself due to her uniqueness as a female instructor. The further patronage of Voarino was nevertheless fascinating. In terms of their profiles, Clias and Voarino differed greatly. Clias, as found noted, held over 1400 pupils during this period, 400 of whom were women and girls.⁵⁹ He had institutional connections and enjoyed a greater relationship with the media in London. The benefit of Voarino’s patronage is not immediately obvious and may well have stemmed from the similarities between their systems. Both advocated bodyweight exercises and moderate to vigorous women for women. Both employed the use of equipment such as the triangle, with only subtle differences in usage; Voarino allowed women to ‘swing’ from the triangle whereas Clias instructed them to keep their feet on the ground.⁶⁰ Furthermore, they were popular advocates of women’s exercise, especially among the nobility. Voarino’s relationship with Mason was less a case of her radically changing her style and more an instance of her deepening her knowledge within the same system.

The following year in 1828, Mason added dancing lessons to her classes and, by that point, was teaching four days a week, and sometimes twice a day. Two further developments are worth noting, the first is Mason’s travels. Reports on Mason, despite her clearly high profile, dropped significantly during 1828 and only returned in volume the following year in 1829. The reason for this, as explained by the Morning Herald in September 1829 was that Mason had travelled to Paris to learn from the French masters there.⁶¹ Resuming her classes, Mason continued to teach both dancing and callisthenics and, showcasing her enduring popularity, advertised four days of teaching a week across two separate locations around London. Mason’s training locations were private rooms hired out for the explicit use of her classes and operated outside of the boarding house where she lived. There were likewise some indications that Mason’s combination of systems was being adopted elsewhere. In this instance, there exists a short snippet from Chester about a Mr. St. Albin whose exercises ‘are taught precisely the same as by Miss Mason’.⁶² It was at this point that Mason’s public profile wanes dramatically in the existing materials. There are scant references to Mason remaining in London and some comments about her teaching well into the 1830s but the fanfare she received during the 1820s was short-lived. It is clear though that Mason did continue some form of correspondence and travel to mainland Europe as snippets from 1831 noted Mason’s ability to teach new dances in classes due to specialist knowledge acquired during ‘frequent opportunities … from visits to and communication with Paris’.⁶³

Unlike many other instructors during this period, Mason did appear to have been a ‘coach of coaches’ in some respect. In 1829 a Miss Giroux from Bath began advertising dance and callisthenic exercise classes to the ‘Gentry of Bath’ and its surroundings. Much in the same way that Mason had taken to Paris to learn from the masters there, Giroux informed potential clients of her trip to London were she had ‘been for some time under the Tuition of the celebrated Mason … in order to perfect herself in Callisthenic and Grecian exercises'.⁶⁴ Suggesting that Giroux learned more than just exercises from Mason, the same advertisement stresses that the callisthenic system on offer was the very same ‘strongly recommended’ by the medical community for removing and lessening deformities within the female body. Giroux’s own career spanned several decades and while reference to Mason was eventually removed from her advertisements, Mason’s initial importance to Giroux was at least telling. There is also the matter of Miss Flindell from London who, like Giroux, began to advertise her callisthenic courses from 1829. Unlike Giroux, however, Flindell did not limit herself to just dancing and callisthenics. She instead offered training in the ‘various branches of learning’, ranging from languages and writing to dancing, needlework and callisthenics.⁶⁵ Flindell likewise advertised her education under Mason and, like Giroux, operated for several decades.

Looking more broadly at Mason’s contributions within British fitness besides her immediate career is a difficult thing to do. While mention of Mason can be found in American, German, British, and Italian literature during the nineteenth century, her legacy, in the way that people credit Ludwig Friedrich Jahn as a ‘father’ of gymnastics, was rarely commented upon.⁶⁶ Returning to the German translation of Mason’s book in the 1890s, she was presented somewhat as a curio, as an early figure in women’s physical education who faded into obscurity.⁶⁷ Nevertheless she warrants some importance for historians of strength coaches. Studying Mason in this way provides an insight into the mechanisms of entry into the profession. Despite the popularity, and indeed volume, of instructors during this period, there was no one certified entry point into this profession. The professionalisation of instructors came first through the military in Britain during the 1860s, and then among the public in the late nineteenth century.⁶⁸ It is arguable that it was only a process that was streamlined and legitimised through official accreditation bodies during the twentieth century.⁶⁹ Prior to that point, a great deal of one’s success, and recognition, stemmed from their ability to leverage relationships, court media attention and establish some form of ‘brand’ for themselves. This was especially the case for women, who were underrepresented owing to the broader gender inequities of the period.

This point about leveraging relationships was especially important in the context of medical endorsements. Oftentimes physicians deferred to the expertise of the callisthenic instructors in these matters which is exactly what happened in the case of Mason, Clias and, others. Mason gained the plaudits from multiple physicians of note and, in doing so, furthered her legitimacy for those sceptical of gymnastics for women. This relationship between physicians and instructors began to fray during the nineteenth century and as argued elsewhere, was often antagonistic by the early twentieth century when physical instructors often proved openly hostile to physicians and vice-versa within the popular sphere.⁷⁰ That Mason fostered good relations with multiple physicians, especially in the realm of women’s training which brought with it prejudices that often-clouded medical pronouncements, was highly skilful.

Did Mason have a legacy then? It is a difficult question to answer, especially when compared to other women who are typically depicted as pioneers within this space. She did not, for example, establish a training college like Martina Bergman-Österberg in the late nineteenth century which went on to encourage multiple splinter colleges for women.⁷¹ Nor did she, like mid-twentieth century instructor Mary Bagot Stack, create a system which was enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of women and continues to this day.⁷² Her heyday came in the mid-1820s and early 1830s where she enjoyed some consistent fame and, judging by her robbery, fortune. She was not as well known, nor impactful, as Clias and yet her biography and influence is important. She was the first woman of note to gain sustained, rather than fleeting, media attention. She engaged in practices – leveraging relationships, courting medical favour, changing her systems, and training others – which later became de rigueur within the fitness industry. While it is easy to be blasé about them now, especially when compared to later figures, they were impressive and creative tactics – at times borrowed from her male counterparts – which allowed her to continue her practice. If later women made a bigger and bolder impact it does not negate the impact, and, indeed, legacy of Mason’s memory, no matter how implicit or subtle it may have been by the mid-century. Her career was illustrative of the development of strength coaching in Britain at this time, especially for those whose reputations operated at a tier below the profession’s great celebrities.

Conclusion

Tantalisingly Mason largely disappears from the record by the 1840s with little indication of any marriage or death notices. She reappeared in the late nineteenth century for a brief period, as some individuals republished her works, and then largely disappeared once more until Jan Todd’s research on women’s physical culture in the mid-1990s.⁷³ Looking at Mason's career, it is necessary to consider her contributions as a window into the broader professional landscape of fitness coaching and its coaching class during the early nineteenth century in Britain. Her career serves as a valuable case study for examining the evolving dynamics within this profession, particularly in terms of social and medical attitudes towards physical fitness, the role of women in an emerging field, and the interplay of societal norms and personal agency. Mason's professional trajectory highlights the complexities and challenges within the fitness coaching industry of that era. Her success, derived from a combination of personal expertise, familial connections, and networks, illustrated the multifaceted nature of career advancement in this field. It underscores the importance of class and, for want of a better phrase, strategic relationships in establishing a foothold in health spaces during this time. Mason’s ability to navigate these aspects, alongside her engagement with contemporary medical discourse and societal concerns about physical health and aesthetics, speaks to the broader context in which fitness coaching developed.

Furthermore, Mason's career provides insights into the gender dynamics of the time. While her gender did play a role in her career, the focus on Mason should not be solely on her status as a woman in a male-dominated field, but rather on how her experiences reflect the broader opportunities and limitations faced by fitness coaches, irrespective of gender. Her story is illustrative of the broader trends in fitness coaching, including the methods of training, the importance of medical endorsement, and the commercial aspects of the profession. Mason's career in nineteenth-century Britain offers a nuanced perspective on the history of fitness coaching. Her story is significant not just for its rarity as an early example of a female coach with a relatively high media profile in this field, but more so for the light it sheds on the complexities of the fitness coaching profession at the time. It highlights the interplay of personal skill, social connections, and societal trends in shaping a career. Mason's experiences, therefore, contribute to a deeper understanding of the evolution of fitness coaching as a profession, its place within the social and medical discourses of the time, and the various factors that influenced its development.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Notes

1 London Packet and New Lloyd's Evening Post, Apr. 12, 1826.

2 Stephen Inwood, Historic London: An Explorer's Companion (London: Pan Macmillan, 2008), 187.

3 Jan Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful: Purposive Exercise in the Lives of American Women, 1800–1870 (Macon: Mercer University Press, 1998), 37–9.

4 Malcolm Tozer, Edward Thring’s Theory, Practice and Legacy: Physical Education in Britain since 1800 (Newcastle: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2019), 65–8.

5 Fred Eugene Leonard, ‘The Beginnings of Modern Physical Training in Europe,’ American Physical Education Review 9, no. 2 (1904): 89–110; Deobold Van Dalen, Elmer Mitchell and Bruce Bennett, A World History of Physical Education (New Jersey: Prentice Hall, 1953), 278–92.

6 Exeter Flying Post, Apr. 27, 1826.

7 Morning Post, May 8, 1826.

8 Exeter Flying Post, Apr. 27, 1826.

9 Ibid.

10 Morning Herald, Sept. 25 1829.

11 Van Dalen and Mitchell Bruce Bennett, A World History of Physical Education, 200–45.

12 Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful, 11–5.

13 Ibid., 12.

14 Danièle Tosato-Rigo, ‘In the shadow of Emile: Pedagogues, pediatricians, physical education, 1686–1762,’ Studies in Philosophy and Education 31 (2012): 449–63.

15 Ibid.

16 Alun Withey, Technology, Self-Fashioning and Politeness in Eighteenth-Century Britain: Refined Bodies (New York: Springer, 2015), 26–34.

17 Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful, 12.

18 P.H. Clias, ‘Application of Gymnastics to the Treatment of Disease’, London Medical and Physical Journal 51, no. 301 (1824): 198–200.

19 On its broader spread see M Krüger, ‘Body Culture and Nation Building: The History of Gymnastics in Germany in the Period of its Foundation as a Nation-State,’ International Journal of the History of Sport 13, no. 3 (1996): 409–17.

20 Conor Heffernan and Joe Taylor, ‘Female Coaches and Female Fitness in Nineteenth Century Britain and Ireland,’ Sport Coaching Review (2023): 3–4.

21 Ibid., 4.

22 Ibid., 4–7.

23 Leonard, ‘The Beginnings of Modern Physical Training in Europe.’

24 Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful, 12–20.

25 Ibid.

26 Ibid., 38–42.

27 This interplay was first discussed in detail in Patricia Anne Vertinsky, The Eternally Wounded Woman: Women, Doctors, and Exercise in the Late Nineteenth Century (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1990).

28 Exeter Flying Post, Apr. 27, 1826.

29 Morning Post, Apr. 10 1826.

30 Morning Herald, Apr. 17 1826.

31 Ibid.

32 ‘Varieties,’ The New Monthly Magazine and Literary Journal, February 1 (1827): 63–4.

33 Ibid.

34 ‘Calisthenic Exercises,’ The Boston Medical Inquirer 5, no. 2 (1827): 67.

35 Jan Todd, ‘The Classical Ideal and Its Impact on the Search for Suitable Exercise: 1774–1830,’ Iron Game History 2, no. 4 (1992): 7–16.

36 ‘Calisthenic Exercises,’ The Boston Medical Inquirer.

37 Exeter Flying Post, Apr. 27, 1826.

38 The Ass, ‘Female Free-Masonry,’ The Ass, 1 (1826): 48.

39 Constitution 1827, Mar. 25 1827.

40 Ibid.

41 ‘Exercises for Ladies. By Donald Walker’, The Gentleman’s Magazine and Historical Review, 7 (1836): 56–7.

42 Marian Mason, On the Utility of Exercise; or, a Few Observations on the Advantages to be Derived from its Salutary Effects, by Means of Calisthenic Exercises (London: T. Clerc Smith, 1827).

43 Marian Mason, On the Utility of Exercise (1827 Reprint) (Friedberg: Bavarian State Library, 1890).

44 On Clias’ popularity see Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful, 13–22.

45 Mason, On the utility of exercise, 14.

46 Ibid., 30.

47 Ibid., 1.

48 Ibid., 36.

49 For how this can be deeply applied in history see Simon Gunn, ‘Translating Bourdieu: Cultural Capital and the English Middle Class in Historical Perspective,’ The British Journal of Sociology 56, no. 1 (2005): 49–64.

50 Heffernan and Taylor, ‘Female Coaches and Female Fitness in Nineteenth Century Britain and Ireland.’

51 Randy Roach, Muscle, Smoke and Mirrors, Vol. 1 (Bloomington: Authorhouse, 2008).

52 This is discussed in Nicholas Tiller, The Skeptic's Guide to Sports Science: Confronting Myths of the Health and Fitness Industry (London: Routledge, 2020).

53 The trial was presented in the media but can be read fully at ‘September 1827, trial of SOPHIA (THE WIFE OF JAMES CHS.) GUNYON JAMES CHARLES GUNYON (t18270913-15),’ Old Bailey Proceedings. Available at https://www.oldbaileyonline.org/ (accessed 29 September, 2023).

54 Calculated using the Bank of England Inflation Calculator. https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/monetary-policy/inflation/inflation-calculator. Accessed 29 September 2023.

55 Age, Dec 16,1827

56 Ibid.

57 Constitution 1827, Mar. 25, 1827.

58 Morning Herald, June 16 1827.

59 These figures related to 1823. By 1826 Clias supposedly had 2,000 clients. Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful, 39.

60 Ibid., 106–8.

61 Morning Herald, Sept. 25, 1829.

62 Chester Courant, Aug. 12 1828.

63 Morning Post, Jan. 12, 1831.

64 Bath Chronicle and Weekly Gazette, Oct. 10, 1829.

65 New Times, Apr. 27 1829.

66 America and German references have already been discussed. On Italian see ‘Della Ginnastica,’ Letture di Famiglia 4, no. 1 (1845): 205.

67 Marian Mason, On the Utility of Exercise (1827 Reprint) (Friedberg: Bavarian State Library, 1890), 2–5.

68 Tozer, Edward Thring’s Theory, Practice and Legacy, 65–8.

69 This was linked to a broader professionalisation of physical education within universities. David J. Whitson and Donald Macintosh. ‘The scientization of physical education: Discourses of performance’, Quest 42, no. 1 (1990): 40–51.

70 Part of this stemmed from physical culturists attempting to encroach on medical fields. Conor Heffernan, ‘Desirable Bodies and Eugen Sandow’s Curative Institute in Edwardian England,’ Social History of Medicine 35, no. 1 (2022): 195–216.

71 Anne Bloomfield, ‘Martina Bergman-Osterberg (1849–1915): Creating a Professional Role for Women in Physical Training,’ History of Education 34, no. 5 (2005): 517–34.

72 Charlotte Macdonald, ‘Body and Self: Learning to be Modern in 1920s–1930s Britain,’ Women's History Review 22, no. 2 (2013): 267–79.

73 Todd, Physical Culture and the Body Beautiful.