men's aprons

[NoahBriggs]

Somewhere in my files is the zillion "gotta-haves" list the Med Department insisted on equipping each already-overburdened surgeon and his steward. I cannot remember if aprons were on said list or not.

Such lack of knowledge is a result of focusing too hard on paper ephemera at the expense of the practical stuff on the back of Aurentieth's Department Store display.

[hta1970]

There is no reference to aprons in the Medical Regulations of the Confederate Army, even though it contains listings of all drugs and other authourized supplies including bedding. There is also no reference in Chisolm's 1864 manual to aprons, even though it too contains listes of supplies for a regiment in the field in its medicine chest and store chest. And finally, aprons are not listed on the Confederate printed "Invoice of Medicines, Instruments, Hospital Stores, Bedding, &c" which was used in 1863.

Has anyone done any looking at primary source invoices and reports other than the ORs?

[Marylander in grey]

All,
I, in my humble opinion, would say that Laundress' were employed by both Armies.
Surgeons would not have stopped thier craft for a trivial change of clothing until thier work ,at which time thier Stewards would have established a more permant hospital senerio, in which laundry services would be at hand.
Also the baggage would have arrived allowing for fresh clothing. I agree with Noah and suggest further research into common everyday wear for thier civilian counter part.
Thank you Harry for doing our homework for us well done.
IMHO YOS

[cwmed]

By the way Godwin of "Sutler or Mt. Missery" sells leather aprons as well as some good looking fleams and turniquets.

Luke Castleberry

http://www.gggodwin.com/

[NoahBriggs]

Godwin's stuff is eighteenth century. That's not a bad thing, just a thought.

[KarinTimour]

Folks:

What about operating in one's uniform coat? My understanding is that in the civilian world, surgeons regularly operated in their frock coats, and used the tails to wipe their scalpels, etc. According to some of the work that I read on Semmelweis's campaign for antisepsis, not only would a surgeon have a professional coat that had dried blood and bits of human detritis on it, some were judged as more expert by the sheer amount of dried gick on their coat tails.

One of the big resistance points for the impelementation of Semmelweis's reforms was that he didn't allow them to wear these coats into surgery, thus halting their ability to increase their public credentials, as their coats then couldn't accrue more and more dried blood and etc. Semmelweis was practicing in Vienna, but wasn't this one of the premier medical training grounds?

Any evidence of American doctors doing the same sort of thing? And would military surgeons have been allowed to do this or would it have interefered with "spit and polish?"

Curious,
Karin Timour
Period Knitting -- Socks, Sleeping Hats and Balaclavas
Atlantic Guard Soldiers' Aid Society
Email: Ktimour@aol.com

[NoahBriggs]

Any evidence of American doctors doing the same sort of thing? And would military surgeons have been allowed to do this or would it have interefered with "spit and polish?"

That's a good question.

Military surgeons had to purchase their own uniforms. Thus I can see an argument not to wipe scaplels on their tails. Plus, the coats are dark blue, not black, so any detritus left on there would show up, and make it somewhat disconcerting to the patients. (This is similar to an argument we hada while back regarding the presence of blood on clothing.)

On the other hand, if this was common practice among physicians here in the States, then I could see a reason for surgeons to carry on the habit. I wonder if this practice was the seed of the derogatory remarks on the poor state of medical care in contemporary accounts? Those accounts need to be read with a grain of salt - often they are written based on fleeting glances and without always understanding the whole context.

[hta1970]

I was at the medical museum in Frederick a few weeks back and don't recall seeing any of the displays illustrating the use of aprons by medical officers. I went back to the website last night and none of the displays show medical officer wearing aprons, including the surgical displays.

Another thought.... What was the time from the wounding of the soldier to the time he saw medical treatment? Presumably anyone with a severed artery would bleed out before he reached a field hospital. And anyone suffering severe blood loss would have a resultant lowered blood preasure stemming the prolific flow of blood....In the 19th century there were no IVs or blood transfusions, which today would maintain blood preasure....

With the complete lack of any evidence that aprons were issued in regulations and invoices, perhaps it was towels, which do show up in regualtions and invoices, which were used to clean hands, etc... as needed...

[Robert A Mosher]

During a visit to the Massachusetts National Guard archives last January, I obtained copies of the surgeon's requisition forms for the early war period as the regiment was being raised and equipped and items were requested of the Massachusetts State Surgeon General. A number of these requisitions are in the nature of preprinted forms listing all of the supplies with the appropriate blank spaces for indiciating amounts ordered or recieved, etc. This set also includes some records for material received such as hospital supplies that includes beds, bedding, etc.

No where on any of this paper work is there an entry for aprons or any other item of clothing. If this was ever an issue item it would appear that it was issued by some other authority than the Medical department.

Robert A. Mosher

[2RIV]

Harry,

I think the spurting blood is a bit over played by most surgeon portrayals. Having witnessed first hand arterial and venous bleeds of all shapes and sizes, rarely does blood fly across the room, although it can shoot pretty far on occasion. Your mention of injury to time of treatment brings this in to closer perspective in the sense that the decrease in systemic blood pressure usually (i say this because every rule has exception) does not make this spraying of blood a lasting effect. In my personal experience, you get one or three good squirts then it winds down to a steady flow. Usually the spray only happens at the onset of the injury and only when it is a small wound into the artery. The larger the wound, the less resistance.

I was more thinking of the apron as a surface to wipe instruments and hands on, but towels would work just as well. I wanted to see if there was any evidence out there to back up what I suspect is totally a reenactorism. I do this because I like to give the benefit of the doubt before I say it is not correct. I would also believe (from personal experience) that one becomes quite adept at keeping clothing clean while working with bodily fluids. Common sense (although I could be wrong) is who would want to smell that all day and ruin a perfectly good coat.