Limbs infected with gangrene were usually cut in order to prevent spreading of the disease or eventual death of the patient (Kirkup 2007).
Prior to the incorporation of the Barber-Surgeons Company in 1540, the training of surgeons was done through apprenticeships, after which they were given oral examinations. However, many barber-surgeon apprentices were illiterate, and there was a huge discrepancy in the training. They also had little anatomical knowledge. On the flipside, more educated surgeons were very few in number at the time. After the incorporation, education became more standardized and anatomy gained a focus in the curriculum. However, given that this is early into the formation of the Company, the increased level of training …show more content…
The worry of the physician could be attributed to the clerical associations of many physicians of the time – being part of the church, they would not have wanted to go against its teachings.
Throughout history, the penalty for injuring or harming a patient as a physician or surgeon was severe. For example, the Hammurabic code states: “If a physician [surgeon] shall make a severe wound with an operating knife and kill him, or shall open an abscess with an operating knife and destroy the eye, his hands shall be cut off.” We can see parallels in Europe in the Middle Ages as well. Killing a patient in the Visgothic code would lead to the party being “handed over to his relatives to treat as they please." This shows overall that the punishment of killing a patient would be severe (Capstick …show more content…
Gersdorff also utilized styptics in order to treat hemorrhaging as opposed to the use of cauterization (Kirkup 2007). These two pieces of information indicate that the physician writing the journal entry may have been trained in Germany or elsewhere on the continent. Many English physicians received their education on the continent before returning to London in order to practice. Universities on the continent provided better medical training than those within England (Copeman 1959).
This wording particularly resonates with the words of Woodall in his book The Surgions Mate (1617), that “For it is no small presumption to Dismember the Image of God.” Though this sentiment comes much after the entry was written, it does give some insight into how amputations were viewed at the time (Kirkup 2007). The clergy was also forbidden from performing surgery due to blood/bodily fluids being thought as of being contaminating, and participation in Eucharist could not be done by “bloodstained hands” (Bagwell
Prior to the incorporation of the Barber-Surgeons Company in 1540, the training of surgeons was done through apprenticeships, after which they were given oral examinations. However, many barber-surgeon apprentices were illiterate, and there was a huge discrepancy in the training. They also had little anatomical knowledge. On the flipside, more educated surgeons were very few in number at the time. After the incorporation, education became more standardized and anatomy gained a focus in the curriculum. However, given that this is early into the formation of the Company, the increased level of training …show more content…
The worry of the physician could be attributed to the clerical associations of many physicians of the time – being part of the church, they would not have wanted to go against its teachings.
Throughout history, the penalty for injuring or harming a patient as a physician or surgeon was severe. For example, the Hammurabic code states: “If a physician [surgeon] shall make a severe wound with an operating knife and kill him, or shall open an abscess with an operating knife and destroy the eye, his hands shall be cut off.” We can see parallels in Europe in the Middle Ages as well. Killing a patient in the Visgothic code would lead to the party being “handed over to his relatives to treat as they please." This shows overall that the punishment of killing a patient would be severe (Capstick …show more content…
Gersdorff also utilized styptics in order to treat hemorrhaging as opposed to the use of cauterization (Kirkup 2007). These two pieces of information indicate that the physician writing the journal entry may have been trained in Germany or elsewhere on the continent. Many English physicians received their education on the continent before returning to London in order to practice. Universities on the continent provided better medical training than those within England (Copeman 1959).
This wording particularly resonates with the words of Woodall in his book The Surgions Mate (1617), that “For it is no small presumption to Dismember the Image of God.” Though this sentiment comes much after the entry was written, it does give some insight into how amputations were viewed at the time (Kirkup 2007). The clergy was also forbidden from performing surgery due to blood/bodily fluids being thought as of being contaminating, and participation in Eucharist could not be done by “bloodstained hands” (Bagwell