Mission

Oh! Oh! A fad! I don't want to miss out... I am running the Mission the Surgeon camp which includes me, Bucky and Becky. I can't seem to get in contact with B&B, so would someone in the Keys please make sure they fill out their consent forms? (You may have to help them. Their memories and penmanship skills aren't so good...) Thanks. Oh, and B&B don't require any 2D tent space, but they do require 3D air space.

Ah, very cool! I look forward to seeing pics of your group's final results. If researching the instruments really interests you, check out those two books I cited above - you can probably get them through your local library. (They're wayyy too expensive to buy - I looked - hard.) They contain a lot of really good photos and info. Notice how the top appears to drop into the outside box to cover the contents in the bottom of the box. This is what I was talking about before. I wouldn't think a plaster box would have a drawer - it would be more like an instrument box which often has a similar drop-in top section. Thanks so much for posting that - I hadn't seen ANY plaster boxes before this and had been previously speculating it was made of plaster. (!! ) Actually, I suspect this style is mostly for land-based medicine chests. If the ship were rocking and rolling on the waves or taking broadsides in a battle, a chest like that would be a huge PITA to work with because the doors would swing unless fastened...and then you wouldn't have easy access to the stuff inside. Several sea surgery books from period go into great detail about preparing the operating area for battle and they don't include fastening up your chest. My concept (and I haven't completely proven this, so it's partly opinion) is that the plaster box and medicine chests were similarly done with drop in sections like the first photo you have posted. I didn't really have a clear thought on the pocket kit until you started this conversation, so that was actually a big help to me. The medicine chest would be more like the Clowes chest that you posted a photo of with a top honey-combed section for square-bottomed bottles - some large ones for frequently used medicines and many smaller ones for less frequently used medicines. It would have a lockable lid. Then there would be two or three drawers that went into the chest below the level of the honeycombs, possibly running the full length of the chest (like the machinist chest in my first post in this thread) to enable the housing of long instruments. (I base this on Woodall's description of some of the stuff that he put into the chests.) One of those 'drawer rows' may have consisted of several smaller drawers like the Clowes chest instead of running the full length. If so, my guess would be the top-most one. The front would have had some sort of fastening & lockable cover as chests purchased by surgeons for the navy were sealed so that they could not be tampered with. There may also have been a secret drawer in the back for medicines that the sailors would have been likely to steal - I have seen more than one reference to such a thing. If so, the bottom drawer would have been shallower than the other drawers to accommodate the secret drawer. I should note that my model for a medicine chest is based largely on the Woodall description of the chest and (more specifically) what it contained. No doubt some surgeons had kits like the one you show above simply because that's what they had. Although I think that sort of chest would have been more expensive than the simple one I am describing. I would suggest that is a home-made kit. Home medicine kits were somewhat popular around period. They would have been small, simple and compact like that one. I believe the Bennion book gives a lot more detail on these. Keep in mind that on long sea trips (many lasting weeks, if not months) the only medicine shipboard would be what the surgeon brought. He could never be sure what he would find in whatever ports the ship stopped, which is why I believe Woodall recommended so many medicines be stocked from the outset. This also informs us as to the necessary size of the chest. One such as you have above would probably have been too small for a long voyage.

I'm not at my computer, but I'd think the dims on the plaster chest would depend more on the instruments stored in them than the plasters. The widest bandage I've read about it 4". But that wouldn't hold very many instruments. OTOH, Yonge refers to taking his with him when he was captured, so I'm guessing it was small enough to be portable. Understand too that the sizes of these things would probably have varied. Woodall's medicine chest calls out a great many more medicines than most others who had listed the ingredients required in a medicine chest. This implies that his surgeons required a larger chest. Since everything was hand-built at this time, I would also expect that chest and cabinet sizes would vary from production lot to production lot, from manufacturer to manufacturer and material would vary based on what was easiest, cheapest and/or most readily available that would fit the need. What are you doing? Making a full medical kit? Do you have your instruments? I am planning to design my kit around my instruments if I ever get to it...my Bone Saw is 25" long and the instrument case has to be able to accommodate it at the very least.

Emplasters were gummy medicines that were smoothed on to bandages. Kind of like pre-medicated bandages. “…you are to get [your chests], with your self and Crew, on Board; and see them placed in a dry Place, and as convenient to be come at as possible. And let your Surgery Chest be fast lashed that it may not over set in bad Weather by the rowling of the Ship. __ And being on Board, see that your dressing box is furnished. [Note: This is the plaster box.] 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 must be carried every Morning to the Mast between Decks, where our Mortar is usually rung, that such as have any Sore or Ailment may hear in any part of the Ship, and come thither to be drest. [Note: This indicates that there was a pocket kit of some kind as well as a plasters box.] But such as by reason of illness cannot come thither you must go to them where Lye.” (Moyle, p. 45-6)

Something I had not thought of before was to look through the images I have scanned from Elizabeth Bennion's excellent book Antique Medical Instruments (Sotheby Parke Bernet, University of California Press, 1979) and John Kirkup's similarly wonderful The Evolution of Surgical Instruments; An Illustrated History from Ancient Time to the Twentieth Century (historyofscience.com, Novato, CA, 2006). I found a photo of the instruments from a pocket kit as well as one with the box included for you that I believe agree with your images: Figure 84, Pocketcase Instruments, Savigny, 1798 (Kirkup, p. 68) Ch. 3 Figure 15., Contents of a pocket case of instruments, dated 1731. (Royal College of Surgeons of England) (Bennion, p. 64) "The seventeenth-century Prujean Collection, now in the Museum of London, includes a case with two trays of intricately-shaped compartments lined with marbled paper (pls. 4-5). Pocket cases opening flat in two halves were made in wood at the same period. __ There is a brass instrument case in the Victoria and Albert Museum, though shagreen seems to have been the most favoured material for these small cases throughout the seventeenth centuries, the boxes being about 12 to 15 cm long with rounded ends. Another particularly interesting example, apparently from 1672, is that shown with the instruments in pl. 13 ([Ch 3.] p. 62). This has a drawer in the base, presumably to hold the sharper instruments more safely. A similar one is in the possession of the Wellcome Collection…From the mid-eighteenth __ century and for most of the nineteenth century, instrument cases of leather, sharkskin, and brass-bound mahogany were standard, fitted inside with velvet-covered slots, larger ones having several trays and side-carrying handles… Silver cases of the etui-type for lancets and, occasionally, other instruments, date from the early eighteenth century. They are of tapering design with the lid at the thicker end, often with intricate hinges and spring clasp; the interiors fitted with a slotted silver grille to hold the lancets… by 1780-90 they had become more delicate and attracted, very often, the prettiest and most intricate bright-cut designs.” (Bennion, p. 276-8)

Excellent find! Thank you ever so much for digging that up! In fact, in design, it sounds very much like the instruments box (which is not the same as that little thing they're calling an instrument box - the ones I'm thinking of held the bone saws, so they would be 2 or 3 feet long and nearly a foot wide.) I had downloaded the Holme book from the university library, but now I find that I only got the first page. (This has happened to me a couple of times; I need to watch that fool download mechanism on their computers more closely in the future...) I perused the Armory very quickly when I found it on the Uni-computer, and it's seemed to me like an almost random scattering of sketches and descriptions of all manner and sort of things. This book reads like stereo instructions. I believe Hurricane has it on CD although I doubt he's reading this thread. If you're really interested, you might shoot him a pm and see if he can dig it up for you. In regard to the box you found on eBay, I would say it's too small to be a plaster box based on my understanding of what it would have contained. The plasters for large wounds of the extremities could be quite large - I seem to recall dimensions of 3 and 4 inches wide that would probably be at least that long if not more. You could hardly fit more than a few band-aids in the drawer of that is about 1/4 - 1/3 the height of a box that is 6.5" x 2.3" x 2" tall. Although I could well be wrong...

No, I have no idea what it looked like - everything I've found I've re-printed here. I'm going to guess that it had at least one tray in it like some of the instrument boxes I've seen from time to time.

I doubt that instrument case will sell. He wants too much for it.

Are those holes in the white pirate's socks? (I wear nice nice socks...even if they are constantly falling down...)

Nice detail on the scissors and forceps. I would love to get some more period-style scissors and forceps in my set - a good kit would have had a wide variety of them. ("Oh mighty eBay...give me cool antique scissors and forceps to bid upon.") Those you have shown are probably all pocket kits. Somewhere previously in this thread I explained that the average sea surgeon would have had (at least) four medical containers: the large medicine chest, the plaster box, an instrument box and a pocket kit. There are also some references to barbering kits in some manuscripts. I think it is Yonge who refers to a pocket kit or some other one of his smaller boxes being wrapped in crocodile or snake skin. He received it by mistake after his ship was taken at sea and his medical items were being returned to him by his captors. So it's not out of the question that a sea surgeon might have had some nicer boxes...although generally I would think it would be less rather than more likely. Many sea surgeons seem to have gone to sea because they didn't have the money or social connections to get a more lucrative land-based position.

I think it's .

It probably had drawers in the bottom part. If you re-read some of the older posts, you'll see that this was typical of medicine chests.

Wow! Nice find, PoD! I love the detail of the top of the chest. These are much more like what I would expect a sea chest to be like than some of the other examples I have cited with the center opening doors. I notice the bottles appear to be square-bottomed as well. Very nice find! Interesting too that they have curved tops. What do you make of that, Ed?

Thanks! I hadn't noticed it was no longer appearing in the first post. Maybe I should fix that... I can't immediately bring to mind whose surgical manual that appears in, but it's actually a sort of diagram to show the different kinds of wounds a person can receive and which the surgeon may have to deal with. (It seemed a bit useless to me as a teaching aid when I first saw it, but it IS quite dramatic looking.)

No, I was just using freedom as the primary motivation for turning pirate (a commonly held believe with insufficient hard proof) to draw a parallel with the notion that pirates were somehow free of the religious conventions of the time. Then we got off on an interesting tangent. But that's kind of how forums work. (I used to mod on a forum where this was strictly disallowed. I am so glad I no longer do as I am often one of the primary offenders.)

Head-aches are a funny thing in the period medical literature. They are frequently mentioned, but the actual treatment is rarely discussed. I think this is in part because they are usually mentioned in conjunction with some other, more severe problem that is actually what the writer is describing. Still, one might be able to discern the head-ache cures from the more general cures, so I will give you a few examples of what I've found in my notes: "Now being a violent Head-ach always __ preceded this Hemorhage, therefore when ever that Symptom came, he took a Purge of Pil. Cochia. Minor. {scruple}ij. which prevented Bleeding. I ordered him to abstain from Capital Liquors, and to drink only Small Beer.” (Moyle, John, Chyrurgic Memoirs: Of many Extraordinaary Cures, London, 1703 p. 43-4) "By which you may perceive that the venting of the ill ayre out, and the receiving of the fresh ayre in, is both the Prevention and Cure of this Accident. But commonly there remaineth an head-ach for a while after, which with some coole perfume, as rose-water poured on a hot fire-shovell, or Camphor held to the parties nose; and the applying of a Rose-cake dipped in Veineger and Rose-water (or in a Veneger alone) to the forehead and temples. After their recovery, it is good also to gargle with warme water, and Oyle of Violets, or Oyle of __ sweet Almonds; and to drinke some fat broths or swallow some warme fat morsels of Mutton or Lambe; or els some fresh butter. Such things doth Haly Abbas in the 6. Booke and 4. Chapter of his Practice appoynt. And the reason I take to be, that Fatty and Oyly things will best heale that harshnesse that the smoake and ill vapours have begotten in the throate and stomacke. If a Feavor succeed, & the constitution require it, Forestus counsaileth to open a veyne.” (Bradwell, Stephen, Helps For Suddain Accidents Endangering Life., Thomas Purfoot, Popes-head Alley, 1633, p. 107-9) "Venesection [or blood-letting] of the two veins behind the ears. Bleeding from both of these will give relief in cases of chronic catarrh, migraine and chronic foul pustules, and scabs of the head... __ __ ..."The action of the two arteries in the temples give relief for chronic migraine and severe headache and constant ophthalmia and the flow of acrid superfluities in the eyes." (Albucasis On Surgery and Instruments; A Definitive Edition of the Arabic Text with English Translation and Commentary, University of California Press, Berkley and Los Angeles, 1973 p. 638-40) Now, as to consumption, my guess would be no, although I didn't find much to support it. "Wharton’s almanac for 1648 predicted an increase in fevers, coughs and consumption as the result of an impending eclipse.” (, Doreen G., Popular Medicine in Seventeenth Century England, Bowling Green State University Popular Press, Bowling Green, OH, 1988, p. 52)

I haven't read the book, but the point about the pirates making laws just as harsh as those they left behind had occurred to me before. It seems a pretty good one to me. Someone around here pointed out in another discussion on this topic (We so rarely strike on completely new ones, do we? ) suggested that if you ran a ship with no rules, you would not be running a ship for very long. Foxe's mutiny argument is an interesting point, but I posit that this could also be the lemming principle at work. How many people are really satisfied at work even today? How many folks would jump at the chance to mutiny if the right leader or group appeared to goad them on? (See the documentary 9 to 5 for reference.) The question then becomes, what did they use to convince them? A good instigator would simply seize upon whatever grievance has the most appeal and agreement among the crew. (This, of course, settles nothing. But it does have human nature in its corner.)

So seeking freedom from oppression is a modern Hollywood notion, or just pirates seeking freedom from oppression? I am saying that I think it is more Hollywood than factual. Sure, some pirates may have done this, but I think it mostly grew out of the whole romantic "young lad takes to the sea to escape his family/homeland/whatever and finds the Navy or merchant service oppressive so he goes pirate" thing. Then he goes all Errol Flynn and fights for the maiden, against oppressive masters or whatever. I'm sure that happened, but probably more as an exception than a rule. My take on it is that the navy released a lot of men from service, the economy turned a bit south and the merchant trade slacked off and you had a bunch of people ill-suited for other jobs who went into piracy. Add slack enforcement of the piracy laws and "legitimate" privateering as an example in certain places and you have rampant piracy during the GAoP. I am admittedly shooting from the hip here a bit because I have read some of this stuff, but not drawn it all together into a logical framework. Foxe could probably give at a better historic spin than I am because I haven't stopped to look at all the dates of events to see how they mesh. Or I might just be all wrong. When it comes down to it, the motivation to turn criminal is probably unique to each individual - although psychologically, many people basically do what their peers are doing. Thus my theory about the navy/economic/rigid job environment explanations.

What?! Now if I were in the mother country, I could do something with that revelation. Of course I'm not so now you're just being cruel to the poor old ship's surgeon & GAoP medicine researcher. If (probably when) I DO get back over there, I'll be far more interested in traipsing through the medical museums than poring over old trial manuscripts. Reading is an activity for leisure time, and not for when you're right in the middle of a trip to a place with multiple small museums... and hand-pulled ale in the pubs...

Post a photo in the gallery and reference it in your post. A picture is worth a thousand words.

No, we can't truly know, and in many cases we can't even guess. But I think you'd be pleasantly surprised at how much documentation is available for many eras and sub-cultures. Well I was referring specifically to the pirates here. I've been reading every account that might contain info on medicine (my personal research topic interest) and there really aren't that many GAoP first person pirate accounts. I would also argue that the bias of the intended reader must be taken into account. For example, if I were to write two letters describing what I did yesterday, one to my mother and one to my sister, they would both be accurate as far as their contents went, but the two letters would be very different. The things I chose to tell my mother about would be different to the things I think might interest my sister. That's a very good point.

Since it is just about impossible to accurately invoke the society of a time passed, I don't think we can truly know the motivation of a person who lived in a period and among a sub-culture that has been so poorly documented. Yes, poorly documented. Sure, we have a few first person accounts, much of which would be thrown out by a proper historian as actual evidence unless it were corroborated by two other sources. We also have the subtly-politically-biased and rather sensationally plotted General History. But we really don't have any unbiased accounts to give us insight. (Well, in fact, I think it is impossible for a human being to write an unbiased account, but that is a discussion for another topic.) Still, in some ways I think people of the past were pretty much like people of the present. By this, I am referring to personality types. In every time and sociological group there are some folks more inclined to be motivated by money, others by spiritualism, still others by logic or order or disorder or idealism or whatever. I posit that humanity contains certain archetypal behaviors and tendencies and they are probably fairly constant among different groups and in different times. But that's only one part of personality - a key to motivation. Another aspect of motivation - the broader society and all the beliefs that go with membership in it - appears to me to have had some marked differences from our time. One could hardly say that the church/religion has anywhere near the influence today that it had during GAoP. Heretical statements are today seen as marketing ploys where at that time they could be a death sentence. I suspect differences in behavior would reveal themselves there. If you are a person who has a strong inclination toward order, the church might have a certain appeal during the GAoP. If you were strongly inculcated into a national religion like many Englishmen were during that time, an idealist might focus on things associated with the spiritual aspects of that religion where today we have less spiritual forms that seem to appeal to many idealists. This is where I think movies (an important part of our society) lead us so astray. Movie-makers usually "modernize" eras (intentionally and not) to make them more relatable to our society. If you watch a movie that has been made several times in different eras, you will notice not only facile differences like those of clothing, language and hairstyles, but deeper, more philosophical differences such attitudes towards religion, governance and personal responsibility. As an experiment to see how much things have changed in the last 100 years, it might be interesting to watch the various versions of a movie that has been remade many times in different eras and note the difference in attitudes, norms and memes. (Brewster's Millions or (more on topic) Mutiny on the Bounty (and all it's various incarnations) could provide good fodder for such an experiment if you are inclined to it.) This 'Hollywood Modernizing Factor' is what I think makes us believe that pirates looked at religion the way our society (or its modern outlaws) look at it. It's why I think many folks come to ideas like: "All pirates would be irreligious" or "Pirates were mostly seeking freedom from oppression" along with other, similar modern concepts we try to impose upon them.

Actually, some merchant seamen would not sail on a ship (when there were enough jobs to be had for them to chose) if the owners hadn't hired a surgeon for the ship. The ship's surgeon was more of a creature of the crew than the owners.

The clyster isn't a weapon! It's a tool of mercy! I am in the process of putting together a page for my web site to explain this poor, misunderstood-by-the-PiP '09-Pirate-Re-enactors instrument. I'll post it later this week. (Ok, where are the next ones? )

Ha ha ha! That's great! Mission: Mercury Barber-Surgeon, Chief Bottle Opener and Jedi Knight. The Mercury - you'll never find a more wretched hive of scum and villainy.