On Making a Medicine Chest

[Misson]

Mission ,I`m not much of a pirate However I would like to make some suggestions in regards to recreating a surgen/medicine chest.

Having had time to study the above pic I would start first by trying to determine the size of the bottle(dia.) thus would give us a clue as to the size or scale of the chest.

One thing that seems ODD is it`s square shape .(Chests aren`t square)

What comes to mine is the Golden Ratio 1.62-1.(greek)

Observe that there is six divisions across and six deep for storing bottles, 36 divisions thus a square chest .Has the artist shortened the debth of the chest to be better proportion within the drawing?

Wow! Did you trace the link to the picture I originally posted back to here? Welcome!

I doubt that most sea surgeon's chests would have been square as well. Sea chests are generally not square. Plus I would think a square chest would be harder to handle than a rectangular one. (Not that this would be that big of a consideration. Once the surgeon was safely ensconced in his quarters - often the orlop deck near the bottom of the ship - he probably didn't have cause to move it around a whole lot.)

As Cascabel also mentioned, surgical chests would have been custom-made. They were certainly hand made, so I am guessing sizes and partitions would be adapted to the needs of the surgeon. Even if the chest that was drawn was actually square as it is shown, that drawing predates period by about 100 years. (When you're pirate re-enacting, "period" is defined as being approximately 1690 - 1725...more or less. (We argue about everything, including the dates of the golden age of piracy).) The problem is that that drawing is the only thing we have representing a surgeon's chest that's even close to the period.

However, I am thinking for something along the lines that were described by John Woodall, who I have quoted above. My inclination is to visualize something along the lines of the ratio you mention...because that would be what I expect to see. (And for no other reason, to be honest. Perhaps because the Golden Ratio has been so prevalent since the Renaissance.)

For example let us start with an assumption that the bottle was 2.5" and would fit comfortably in a 3" square division as shown.That would suggest an 18" width .Now back to that Ratio. It would suggest 9 bottles or divisions deep which now totals 27" deep. 54 divisions. Isn`t that room enough now for the surgens 24" bone saw.

Yes, that's true. Still, that would be a difficult chest to man-handle below decks. I personally have doubts that the bottles were all the same size. Just as today, different elements were needed in different quantities. I notice that in reading former sea-surgeon Richard Wiseman's Eight chirurgical treatises (1696), certain elements are continuously repeated in prescriptions, while others appear infrequently. Why have large bottles for things that are not used often or which may go bad? (Woodall has much to say on elements going bad during a voyage and recommends either not bringing them or only bringing a small amount.)

I half suspected that the drawing that appears in Clowe's book is as much a presentation piece as it is an actual surgeon's chest. This is interesting...:

"Here, too, began his life-long friendship with John Banester, a fellow surgeon in the field wo was four years his senior, and for many years he kept by him the "surger chest", well fitted out and emblazoned with the Bear and Ragged Staff of Warwick's arms, with which he began his surgical career. Twenty-five years later, he had a drawing made of it for his book A Prooved Practice, but in the 1596 edition, this is replaced by the illustration of a new chest, decorated with the Royal coat of arms, which he probably acquired when he was appointed Surgeon to the Queen." (Gathered from the internet, St. Michael's Living History, 6/22/09)

This makes it sound like there are two drawings - which, if true, I didn't know about. Either way, by the time he wrote his book, Clowes was a wealthy land-based surgeon and could afford a nice presentation chest. Land-based surgeons were in a different class entirely (especially surgeons to the queen!) and called primarily on wealthy patients - many of whom wanted nothing in common with the rabble. One of my book talks at length about how the style of eye glasses for the wealthy changed because they didn't like the fact that the common people could get the other style. So the chest may have even been designed to make Clowes more appealing to his patients. A sea-surgeon was usually just entering his career and probably couldn't afford something like Clowes would have. (I doubt the East India Company painted coats of arms inside each surgeon's chest it issued...)

My thoughts on the panel, Why have a locked chest if there wasen`t a hinged panel.That panel folded up to secure the lower drawers. A dual action lock would then secure both lid and panel. I`v seen many fishing tackel boxes this way with two hinges below connecting the panel to the base of the case.

And one last observation, Where are the handles! I would assume there was to be one on the front panel to open and one at the rear together for lifting and transport.

Let me know your thoughts.

Regards,John

WWW.MACHINISTCHEST.COM

Well, again, I suspect this may have been a presentation piece - at least in part. That's a good point about the handles...especially for a box as large as you mention. It would have been very hard to move around.

I should note that I don't actually know that there locks on surgeon's chests. I have not yet seen anything about this in my reading. I want them more to protect my tools from theft than anything else.

Edited June 22, 2009 by Misson

[Misson]

I should note that I don't actually know that there locks on surgeon's chests. I have not yet seen anything about this in my reading.

I may have to take that back. I was thinking about this and I recalled that surgeon's chests for the Royal Navy were sealed and locked (sealing probably would have been done with wax and the seal) to prevent the surgeon from selling the items and ingredients purchased for them. I do note that this is a little out of period, but I offer it as potential proof that the chests would have to have been capable of being locked. Certainly their design would have had to have allowed for being enclosed to be sealed.

"To this end it was stated in the naval regulations in 1731 that the instrument chest of every naval surgeon had to be examined by the physician at the Royal Naval Hospital in Greenwich and also by the Company of Surgeons. This privilege was granted to the Surgeons in 1629 by the charter of Charles I and, for some reason was an entitlement they highly regarded and fought hard to retain. After the chest had been examined, it was to be locked ‘and the seals of the Physician and of the Surgeon’s Company to be affixed thereto in such a manner, as to prevent its being afterwards opened, before it comes on board; nor is the captain to admit any Chest into the Ship without these marks upon it.’…

The chest was sealed after being examined to prevent the surgeon selling some of the instruments before he sailed in order to reimburse himself of some of the expense of its purchase. That this precaution was considered necessary again demonstrates the hardships of the young surgeons." (Goddard, Jonathan Charles, “An insight into the life of Royal Naval surgeons during the Napoleonic War, Part I", Journal of the Royal Naval Medical Service, Winter 1991, p. 207-8)

[Edit] Ah, but Woodall apparently sealed the chests as well! And he was pre-period, so I think we can safely say the chests could be enclosed.

“[Woodall] addressed the problem of poorly stocked ships by redesigning the surgeons’ chests and implementing a system of checking each chest and sealing it before it was brought onboard.” (Hazelwood, Glen, “John Woodall: From Barber-Surgeon to Surgeon-General,” Proceedings of the 12th Annual History of Medicine Days, March 2003, 120)

Edited June 22, 2009 by Misson

[Raphael Misson]

Now this might throw a monkey wrench into our alleged understanding of the surgeon's chest. There's a BRN naval apothecary chest (which serves most of the functions described above of the surgeon's chest) that looks square and...well, pretty much like Clowes' surgical chest. Except this one was built between 1840 - 1870 based on the maker - according to the research done by the seller. Since eBay is so transitory, I've copied the photos to my website - let me post them, followed by the relevant bits about the chest (the size is very interesting).

(Below, the drawer with one of the tins is open)

(Below, the drawer, with the tins and "secret compartment cover" removed)

"...a wooden box, probably mahogany, a Navy apothecary box and with 2 early medical bottles included (found in box). The silver tag attached to the box reads, "W & H Hutchinson...Sheffield...Surgical Instruments Makers to the Royal Navy." There are also some hand-written marks on the tag. Size of the box is 7-3/8 x 7-3/8 x 7-3/4". It is really a square box with some shrinkage accounting for the difference in measurement. The brass handle on top of the box opens to what looks to be the original velvet liner on top and 14 separate compartments where the apothecary bottles would be placed. The 2 bottles in the box were obviously here originally as they fit perfectly into 2 of the compartments.

Then there is a handle low on the front of the box which opens to a small drawer with two tin boxes that can be removed. In this lower drawer there is also a "hidden compartment" where perhaps the opium was kept. I do not know what the secondary woods are. A couple of the drawers below have somewhat of a reddish wash that may have been the result of chemicals or medicines kept within these. The hinges that attach the lid to the box appear to be replacements, but fit perfectly between the wood "slides" on the back. The bottom of the box still shows much of the grungy buildup of finish and wax. It is in 4 slats of wood and all the nails used to construct the box are square nails. "

Another eBayer has noted that "This is not a surgical instrument box. It is a naval physician/surgeon's Apothecary chest." (Which could also easily be referred to as a Medicine Chest, it would seem to me.)

"My research shows this maker, Hutchinson, was in business between 1840-1870 era, so this box would have been made during that time. The company was one of the major producers of medical/surgical instruments and boxes. "

The auction is here. (It's too far out of period to be of interest to me.)

Now, from what I see here, I draw some conclusions that may or may not be correct. First, the medicine chest or apothecary chest has been around for a long time (Clowes being around in the mid/late 14th century and this box coming from the 19th.) Since this is a naval chest, the BRN apparently had them made in this configuration. However, it is definitely smaller than what Woodall is referring to. It also appears much smaller than Clowes' chest - probably because medicine was much better understood by the mid-nineteenth century and required fewer ingredients. (Woodall specifies over 250 separate ingredients!)

Hmph. I am being called out to dinner. I have an idea there were three boxes for medical items. The medicine chest containing some tools but mostly medicine, a surgical tool chest of some sort containing the majority of the surgical tools and the "plaster" box. I think there may also have been pocket kits containing scalpels, lancets, needles and the like. I will post more as I think I have figured it out.

Edited June 28, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[machinistchest]

Cool,

Glad you saved those pics. I`ll have to add to my ebay searches apothcary naval. I can see where there was a rod that extened down thru and into the lower drawer to secure it, notice on the back of the same lower drawer where there is a ware mark from the rod it`s in line with both holes . The bottles were square!

Thanks ...MC

Edited July 8, 2009 by machinistchest

[Commodore Swab]

I think that the bottles are the clue that needs to be pursued. I can't imangine medicine bottles all being the same size and shape. The reason for this is because some medicines would be used much more requiring larger bottles. If I am right about this it throws almost everything about the picture of the chest out of whack. I think that the artist would of started by drawing the general shape of the chest since that is what the drawing is of. For this he would of wanted to to be reconized as a medicine chest and while they might not of been square judging from his drawing it would of been much more square than say a sea chest so it was drawn square. The second feature that would identify it as a medicine chest would be that it needed medicine. For ease of drawing simply devide the square into smaller squares and put bottles in them. Being drawn with bottles and square is what identifies this as a medicine chest. The fold down door and drawers behind would of been inconclusive identifying it as a medicine chest as it could of been mistaken for some writing desk or such. Once he had drawn the chest in such a way that it was identifieable as a medicine chest he could indulge in the remainder of the artwork which I feel he enjoyed drawing more.

Once again my opinion . . .

I feel a surgens chest (I say surgeons now as there isnt anything drawn on the chest to make it look like anything other than a medicine chest, look at old chinese medicine cabinets tons of drawers) should be squarish but not totally square with the top section holding a variety of medicines/drugs (for recreating look at spice bottles or in a place like pier 1) each bottle having its own place made to fit. Selecting these bottles will be hard because being irrigular shaped they must be compiled so that they completly fill in the top. Below there should be drawers to hold the various tools.

Just my $.02

CS

[Raphael Misson]

Cool,

Glad you saved those pics. I`ll have to add to my ebay searches apothcary naval. I can see where there was a rod that extened down thru and into the lower drawer to secure it, notice on the back of the same lower drawer where there is a ware mark from the rod it`s in line with both holes . The bottles were square!

Thanks ...MC

Ah, I didn't notice the rod! Very interesting!

Yes, the square bottles were preferred according to one book.

"In the last place, let me advise you to take such care in putting up of your Medicines, as that they may be preserved good as long as possible.

For this end you had better have square double Glass Jars and Bottles, then Gallipots; for these will fit the partitions in your Chest better than the others, and indeed will preserve your Medicines cooler and better."

And let each Jar or Bottle, that you carry your Fermenting Medicines in, be larger than to hold the quantity you put in them, that there may be

__

room to ferment, and let them be covered well that the Air spoil them not.

And let not the Syrup Bottles that will ferment, be Corked, but only their Covers tyed hard down and pricked. (Moyle, John, Chirurgus Marinus or The Sea-Chirurgion. (1693 edition), p. 41-2)

---

He also says this, which I found interesting.

"And if the partitions in your Surgery Chest are not lined with Bayes,

__

you must wrap your Jars and Bottles in Towe [linen], to preserve them from breaking in carriage or removing.

...

Now in Merchant Men (and in some of the Men of War) the Surgeons use to carry their Druggs in the bottom of their Surgery Chests, but I have found a great inconveniency in it, and there must be a preposterous rummaging and displacing of things, to get at what you would have, and Papers breaking [the dry 'medicines' are wrapped in paper], and one thing mixing with another, besides the danger of breaking Bottles, and spilling and spoiling medicines.

'Tis far better to let partitions be made all over the bottom of your Surgery Chest, and there to place your largest and weightiest Jarrs and Bottles. [This supports the idea of different sized bottles which we were talking about previously.]

And as for your dry things that are done up in Papers; carry a single Drugg Chest, and let them be decently stowed there.

__

And there likewise your set of large Instruments may be kept [Here's where the Bone Saw goes, according to Moyle!], because in that Chest there is nothing but what is dry.

Here you may keep your dryed Herbs, Flowers, Roots, Seeds, Farrinas [probably flours], and likewise your Roulers [strips of linen used as bandages], Splints, Skins, Bladders&c. As also your Box of first Intentions; that is, dismembering Pledgits [compresses of absorbent material, often lint], Buttons [button-like/sized pieces of lint or linen], and Tents [roll of absorbent material, often medicated to keep a wound open], ready made; some larger and some lesser, for any Stumps or Vessels, or Gunshot Wounds or Stabs, that may offer." (Moyle, p. 42-4)

---

At this point, my supposition is that the "Drugg Chest" is a single or possibly double level box that would house the saws, retractors, bullet extractors, capital knife and other large surgical instruments, probably with some sort of compartmentalization to keep the paper-wrapped items safe from the pointed and bladed instruments. If it is double-leveled, I would suggest the top part would be removable and would contain the instruments. The bottom part would contain the dry medicines and bandages.

So now we have a Surgery Chest - containing "wet" medicines, which I suspect is square-shaped, and a Drug Chest - containing "dry" medicines, pre-prepared bandages and large instruments, which I suspect is a long box.

Below is an example of a mid 18th century surgeon's kit in the style of box I am thinking about (sort of) from the Pirate Soul museum in Key West:

Note that this box contains no space for medicines and bandages. Thus Moyle's "Drugg Chest" would almost surely be larger to accommodate these items.

---

But, like a Ginsu knife commercial, there's more!

"And being on Board, see that your dressing box is furnished. [A third box! I believe this is the same thing as the Plaster box identified by Woodall, as you'll see presently.]

That is a Box with 6 or 8 Partitions in it, and a Place for Plaisters ready spread. In the Partitions you put your Pots and Glasses of Balsams and Oyles for present use.

Now this Box as well as your pocket Instruments [a fourth item] must be carried every Morning to the Mast between Decks, where our Mortar is usually rung [if I understand this correctly, he must have a metal Mortar and Pestle set which he strikes to announce the morning medicine brigade. If...], that such as have any Sore or Ailment may hear in any part of the Ship, and come thither to be drest. But such as by reason of illness cannot come thither you must go to them where they Lye." (Moyle, p. 46)

---

So, according to Moyle, who is right in the middle of period, unlike any previous author I have cited, we have four instrument and drug transports. The Surgeon's chest, the Drug Chest, the Plaster Box and the Pocket Kit.

A note on the Pocket Kit - these had been around for a long time by the time the 18th century dawned and there are many examples of them. The often contained small items like needles, fleams (for bloodletting), lancets, small scissors and forceps. Here is an example of such a kit that I own (about 100 years outside of period based on the style of the forceps' handles):

Edited July 8, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[Calico Jack]

By-the-bye, Mister Mission/Misson, in case it does not get said often enough:

Thank you.

From all those of us who so rarely get to head out and check actual primary sources in the flesh, thank you. Many an author is less willing to share the research until AFTER a book is published, so your gentlemanly willingness to let us all use the bounty of your travels is VERY much appreciated. A knuckled brow to you, sir. Gentleman as well as a scholar.

[Raphael Misson]

You're welcome. Of course, you are assuming I will ever get around to writing an actual book or that if I do that it will ever get published.

However, everyone interested in period correctness should absolutely have to read primary sources. It's like being punished for all your previous sins of poorly documented opinions about period. (Especially when you try to interpret the Latin parts.)

"Thank you sir, may I have another!"

Edited July 14, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[Raphael Misson]

Of course the real reason I don't mind posting all my quotes is because I randomly change the spelling of certain words (you can't tell properly misspelled words from intentionally misspelled words in period documents) and word order in some of the quotes I post. That way if someone copies the quotes I have intentionally altered in a published work, they'll get some of it wrong.

I don't change them enough to alter the meaning - I wouldn't want to mislead folks seeking info - but I change them just enough to be able to spot someone stealing my hard work. It might also make them look a bit silly if someone compares their quote with the original document.

"Sneaky little hobbitses. Wicked, tricksy, false!"

Edited July 15, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[PoD]

This surgical kit is on ebay now but it doesnt have a date on it so not sure if its period correct or not.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270432241155&viewitem=&sspagename=ADME%3AB%3AWNARL%3AGB%3A1123&salenotsupported

[Raphael Misson]

This surgical kit is on ebay now but it doesnt have a date on it so not sure if its period correct or not.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=270432241155&viewitem=&sspagename=ADME%3AB%3AWNARL%3AGB%3A1123&salenotsupported

It's not. Some of the instruments are stainless and the scissor handles are wrong for period. I'd say it's 19th c.

Edit: Looking at the auction they mention that some of the handles are ebony. Those seem to have been popular starting around the civil war period. Definitely 19th c. Plus I think that's kind of expensive for that kit...I notice no one has bought it.

Edited July 26, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[PoD]

This surgical kit is on ebay now but it doesnt have a date on it so not sure if its period correct or not.

http://cgi.ebay.co.u...alenotsupported

It's not. Some of the instruments are stainless and the scissor handles are wrong for period. I'd say it's 19th c.

Edit: Looking at the auction they mention that some of the handles are ebony. Those seem to have been popular starting around the civil war period. Definitely 19th c. Plus I think that's kind of expensive for that kit...I notice no one has bought it.

Yeah he had put it on as an auction before with a reserve price but no one bought it then either.

Edited July 26, 2009 by PoD

[Fox]

I could be wrong, but I think that although some experimentation was done with corrosion resistant metals in the 19thC, what we would today call stainless steel is a 20thC invention.

[Raphael Misson]

Further research suggests you are right, Ed. I wonder if the scissors were added to the kit? They're the things that look stainless to me. Well, those and the saw blade, but that's not that surprising because saw blades were replaced. (The other instruments mostly seem to have a dull patina and even some corrosion that suggests a raw metal to me. It's mostly guesswork, though. This is why eBay is tricky - lucky I am not so particular that the instruments I purchase are certifiably GAoP era. Lucky for my wallet, too.)

However, I am pretty sure that I read that ebony handles went out with stainless medical instruments because of the risk of infection. Yet another reason the scissors may not belong to the original kit.

Edited July 26, 2009 by Raphael Misson

[Raphael Misson]

Here are some images I acquired/learned about this past weekend at Paynetown in a discussion with the very knowledgeable Micheal Stevens. He's with a Scottish re-enactment group and talks about Herbs and Spices (among other things).

The first is something he told me about, the medicine chest of Sir Stewart Theipland, physician to "Bonnie" Prince Charlie during the Jacobite revolution in the 1740s. I figure this chest dates to some period after 1742:

http://www.rcpe.ac.uk/images/library/exhibitions/enlightenment/med_chest.jpg

This chest is said to have been given to Threipland by the prince and I expect it is an exceptional example of a medicine chest, probably making it far more elaborate than a typical sea surgeon's chest. (Sea surgeons were usually fresh out of school and unable to establish a lucrative land practice, so they would most likely have had pretty mean chests.) In addition, this is a land-based medicine chest which from pics I have seen I believe are more elaborate and sometimes larger because space was not at such a premium as it is shipboard.

The other is the liquor cabinet Michael made for himself. It looks remarkably like what I am starting to think a medicine chest would look like. It's about the size, shape and design I believe we are talking about. He made this one himself and fitted it to the bottles he was able to acquire. It's leather wrapped. A beautiful piece of work:

Edited October 20, 2009 by Mission

[Raphael Misson]

I found another apothecary chest on eBay. The price is ridiculous and it is way out of period (the seller estimates it to be 1870), but it's still kind of interesting for various reasons. (Among them to me are the locking drawer, the bottle shapes, the compartment for the balance scale and weights and the apparent inclusion of the original medicines. I wonder if the tin containers would have been used during period for caustic medicines?) Again, the shape is similar to the drawing by Clowes, although it looks far to small to be an effective ship's surgeon's chest. I believe this would be a personal (home) land-based kit. Home apothecary kits were popular during the 19th century from my reading. According to the label on it it was sold in Portsmouth, so it might have been purchased by a sailor (Who knows?).

The auction's description says,

"YOU ARE BIDDING ON AN EXCELLENT VICTORIAN (C.1870 ) APOTHECARY CABINET IN WALNUT WOOD COMPLETE WITH BOTTLES, PESTLE AND MORTAR, SCALES, AND WEIGHTS, GRADUATED MEASURE, METAL POISON CONTAINERS AND LOCKING DRAWER.THE WALLNUT CABINET IS 101/2" x 7 1/2" x 9" IS IN VERY GOOD CONDITION. THE MEDICINE BOTTLES HAVE THE ORIGINAL LABELS, ONE IS BROKEN."

I saved the photos for later reference. Here are a few of them:

[Mission]

Aha, another proclaimed sea surgeon's chest has shown up on eBay here. (It's due to end soon, so you'll probably miss it, but I captured some photos so I can blather on about them.) It looks like this:

The description yells at you:

"RARE 19TH PRIMTIVE DOVETAILED MEDICAL SEA TRAVELING CHEST AND BOTTLES. NICE HAND DOVETAILED EARLY MEDICAL CHEST . COMES WITH 21 BOTTLES AND GLASS COVERS. ALSO A FEW EXTRA COVERS. SOME ARE IN GOOD SHAPE AND SOME HAVE CHIPS AROUND THE EDGES, SO IM SELLING THEM ALL SOLD AS IS, AS SEEN CONDITION IN THE PHOTOS. THE HAND DOVETAILED CHEST MEASURES 14 INCHES WIDE BY 10 1/2 DEEP BY 8 INCHES TALL. THE BOX APPEARS TO BE MADE OF PINE. ALL HAND MADE. GREAT FINE QUALITY DOVETAILED CONSTRUCTION. FRESH ESTATE FIND. THE PAST OWNER WAS USEING THIS FOR A SPICE CHEST, SINCE THEY HAVE SOME SPICE LABLES ON SOME OF THE BOTTLES."

The past owner may or may not have been using this as a spice chest as spices were often used as medicines, but that's quibbling. The thing is well outside period and the bottles are round, so I would pass on this anyhow. But the size and shape interest me as it sort of reminds me of a slightly smaller version of the one Clowes talked about in the 15th c. (Note that the design is entirely different and it has no drawers or other compartments like his does.) It doesn't jibe with Woodall's massive list of ingredients in any way, however.

Here's some more photos. It looks like a nice box, if nothing else.

[Mission]

John over at Machinestchest.com sent me a heads up on a 17th medicine chest that I hadn't seen on eBay. You can find the auction here. It is going for the princely sum of $20,000 which is a bit outside of my price range for re-enactment items. In fact, it is a bit outside of my price range for most things, other than automobiles. It also includes many surgical instruments many of which I know are typical to period (some of them I'm not so sure - like the metal medical containers.)

Note that I do not think this is a sea chest because the design is different than all the sea chests I have seen thus far. It also would appear to be too small for a ocean going surgeon, because such surgeons had to carry all the medicines they would need for the voyage to their destination. This isn't to say it couldn't be carried to sea for more local use, but I suspect it is for a land-based surgeon. Still, it is a lovely piece and so I am sharing it. Thanks to John for the heads up.

The auction says:

"Offered to you is this Extremely Rare 18th century (1700s) antique medical doctor’s mahogany chest with various instruments and equipment inside. This chest was used between 1700 and 1760. The case is made of mahogany wood, reinforced with bronze and lined with velvet plush. It opens as a convenient chest with drawers. Remnants of labels in Latin on some of the drawers. There is a secret lockable drawer on the back, which was used to store some tools made of gold as well as special medicines. The handle is made of bronze and has a special bed designed for it so it doesn’t protrude.

Such chests were used by naval and military doctors and contained everything needed to perform basic surgical and other manipulations whenever a hospital wasn’t available. There are various instruments used in giving lifesaving first aid to soldiers suffering bullet or sharp object wounds, as well as original equipment used in the making of various medicines. There is an amputation saw, surgical needles, scalpel, scissors and bullet probes made of natural bone, as well as metal bullet extractor (scoop). Various other apothecary equipment as scales, bottles, jars etc. Dimensions: 11” x 10” x 7”. Truly a collector’s piece that would proudly take its place in any museum or private collection."

There are a ton more pics on the auction which I won't reprint here for bandwidth reasons, but of all the instruments, I really like the scissors:

[sebastian]

John over at Machinestchest.com sent me a heads up on a 17th medicine chest that I hadn't seen on eBay. You can find the auction here. It is going for the princely sum of $20,000 which is a bit outside of my price range for re-enactment items. In fact, it is a bit outside of my price range for most things, other than automobiles. It also includes many surgical instruments many of which I know are typical to period (some of them I'm not so sure - like the metal medical containers.)

Note that I do not think this is a sea chest because the design is different than all the sea chests I have seen thus far. It also would appear to be too small for a ocean going surgeon, because such surgeons had to carry all the medicines they would need for the voyage to their destination. This isn't to say it couldn't be carried to sea for more local use, but I suspect it is for a land-based surgeon. Still, it is a lovely piece and so I am sharing it. Thanks to John for the heads up.

The auction says:

"Offered to you is this Extremely Rare 18th century (1700s) antique medical doctor's mahogany chest with various instruments and equipment inside. This chest was used between 1700 and 1760. The case is made of mahogany wood, reinforced with bronze and lined with velvet plush. It opens as a convenient chest with drawers. Remnants of labels in Latin on some of the drawers. There is a secret lockable drawer on the back, which was used to store some tools made of gold as well as special medicines. The handle is made of bronze and has a special bed designed for it so it doesn't protrude.

Such chests were used by naval and military doctors and contained everything needed to perform basic surgical and other manipulations whenever a hospital wasn't available. There are various instruments used in giving lifesaving first aid to soldiers suffering bullet or sharp object wounds, as well as original equipment used in the making of various medicines. There is an amputation saw, surgical needles, scalpel, scissors and bullet probes made of natural bone, as well as metal bullet extractor (scoop). Various other apothecary equipment as scales, bottles, jars etc. Dimensions: 11" x 10" x 7". Truly a collector's piece that would proudly take its place in any museum or private collection."

There are a ton more pics on the auction which I won't reprint here for bandwidth reasons, but of all the instruments, I really like the scissors:

[PoD]

I've seen a few examples of that kind of chest and in all the ones i have seen the open shelves are supposed to hold large square bottles (http://www.phisick.com/a6acy1.htm although this is out of period). This would mean that this particular chest could hold 22 bottles of various medicines. The square chests at the top of this post hold 36 by the looks of it (and thats just in the top part).

Would the size of the chest not depend on the size of the ship it was on and the number of crew on the ship, much like modern first aid kits? or would they have been a standard "one size fits all" item?

I found a picture of this Georgian apothecary chest that has a door on both the front and rear of the box which may point to the fact that the square panel on the side of the box in the illustration at the top of the post may indeed be a door. With a box that large it would surely maximize the space available if you were able to get access to the middle of the box too.

[Mission]

Square bottles are definitely correct to period. Somewhere around here (probably in this post under one of my other IDs) I quote Moyle on this point. For a chest this old, I wouldn't be surprised if the bottles were changed. I don't think the mortar and pestle would be in the chest at all and I have doubts that the small bone saw would be in there either. Still, they are nice instruments and do appear reasonably close to period as I noted.

I do recall reading something about different sized naval ships requiring more medicines. This could mean bigger medicine chests, especially since everything was hand-built in those days. Of course, they could also have more than one chest if they were standard. (They may have been standardized for ship sizes in the Navy, although I don't really know that.)

On the other hand, Woodall explicitly defines what would go into a medicine chest for the East India company and I would be inclined to think his chests would all be of a similar size. Since Woodall lists over 200 medicines I would be inclined to think a chest like this would be far too small. OTOH, he also suggests that some medicines were highly recommended for certain types of voyages. This implies that not all medicines were recommended for all voyages and we're back to each chest being hand made and assembled.

Still, every sea medicine chest I've seen on either side of period is different than this one, so I still say it is probably a land chest.

[Mary Diamond]

Oooh! That is a lovely find, Mission! The scissors are really quite nice ~

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Oh Crap! Hand-forged scissors.... why, why, why? I don't have enough time as it is you, you, instigator of awfullness. Gotta get through with the worms and linstocks, and now this! You're a bad influence Mission. Bad, bad Mission.

Bo

[Mission]

Oh Crap! Hand-forged scissors.... why, why, why? I don't have enough time as it is you, you, instigator of awfullness. Gotta get through with the worms and linstocks, and now this! You're a bad influence Mission. Bad, bad Mission.

Bo

¿Qué?

[PoD]

I just found this picture of a russian medical chest from the late 17th century. It's probably not that relevant to pirates and ships but it does show how the bottles were sealed.

Medicine Chest

Russia, Late 17th century

Bone, wood, brass and foil; carved and engraved. 23.5x24.5x23.5 cm

Source of Entry: State Museum of Ethnography of the Peoples of the USSR, Leningrad. 1941

Edited January 4, 2010 by PoD