The Indian Mutiny – Part 2

The history of European surgery in the 18th century: The Italian innovator Giovanni Alessandro Brambilla (1728–1800) at the Hapsburg court of Joseph II of Austria. A pioneer of medical and surgical education in the field of military medicine

In an article published in this journal (V (1981), 1), I argued that we will not be able to fully understand the political significance (if any) of the widespread eruption in John Company's Bengal Army in 1857, unless we hear from the “other side of the hill,” from the alienated sepoy officer and rank and file. In the interim we have heard principally from several senior British writers. And because of, for instance, a much flawed research methodology, they have reached unanimity in their analysis of the shock to British rule in India: it was simply a mutiny, one absolutely void of any organized political aims or expressions. The work of Thomas Spear is typical. He has this to say in his India: A Modern History concerning the question of the mutiny as a nationalist movement, a war of independence: “The view that the mutiny was a concerted movement against the British, a violent predecessor of Mahatma Gandhi's campaigns, overlooks the fact that there was then no Indian nation.” He adds: “The new classes with ideas of nationalism were then very few in numbers and they were wholly opposed to the movement.” Philip Mason added the weight of his distinguished reputation to this chorus of disbelievers, who appeared to cringe in retrospective horror at the thought that the good and faithful sepoy could harbor such hideous–and ungrateful–thoughts as freedom from (what was) alien tyranny. After all, Mason muses, did not every British writer up to the mutiny repeat the belief that the Indian soldier had no sense of nationalism? No, he concludes smugly, the Indian soldier had no national feeling until long after World War One. The sepoy was, then, nothing more than a mindless mercenary-child-robot. The mutiny, however, and the other disturbances among the native soldiery prior to 1857, would indicate that the British, then and now, never fully understood their Indian auxiliaries.

POLITICS IN MEDICINE: THE GEORGIA FREEDMEN'S BUREAU AND THE ORGANIZATION OF HEALTH CARE, 1865-1866 Todd L. Savitt The mortality of the negroes in and near large towns and cities still continues to be very great. The small-pox still rages among them. One colored carpenter in this city [Macon], who employs four hands, said . . . that it was as much as he and his men could do to make the coffins that were ordered from him. New York Times, Jan. 22, 1866 I was sorry to hear that the small-pox had broken out in Athens ... as for the Negroes I don't care how many of themhave it—so they die. It isareal luxury now to know that they are shuffling off their thieving coils. Martin J. Crawford to Mrs. Howell Cobb, Nov. 3, 18651 For the present I do not regard it my duty to assume the charge ofthose cases of smallpox that may occur in the city—it is fully able to provide its own sanitary institutions, and support its own poor. Dr. J. W. Lawton, surgeon-in-chief, Medical Department , Freedmen's Bureau, Georgia, to Dr. A. T. Augusta, assistant surgeon, Lincoln Hospital, Savannah, Nov. 21, 18652 Of all the functions and activities of the Bureau of Refugees, Freedmen and Abandoned Lands (Freedmen's Bureau), provision of medical care should have been the least controversial. Bureau physicians were not enforcing labor contracts, adjudicating disputes between former masters and slaves, or teaching blacks to read, write, and calculate . They were establishing and manning hospitals, dispensing drugs, treating smallpox, cholera, and malaria. Their mandate was to facilitate for blacks the transition from free medical care provided by slave1 Quoted in Alan Conway, The Reconstruction of Georgia (Minneapolis, 1966), p. 64. 2 Georgia, Surgeon-in-Chief, Letters Received Unentered, 1865-67, box 1; hereafter cited as Ga LRU. Civil War History, Vol. XXVIII, No. 1 Copyright©1982by The Kent State University Press 0009-8078/82/2801-0003 $01.00/0 46civil war history owners to self-care, and to ease for whites the problems of providing such care to large numbers of indigent freedmen during the unsettled immediate postwar period. Unfortunately, these ideals, conceived in Washington, were difficult to realize at the state and local levels. In organizing its operation, the Medical Department could not avoid entanglement in the Bureau's political disputes with civil authorities and local white residents simply because it was an extension of that federal agency. Its presence and assistance was necessary, even welcomed, but it was also resented for intruding into local affairs. Moreover, some of the Medical Department's actions seemed calculated to advance political points rather than to help the sick and injured. In addition, Bureau physicians encountered numerous bureaucratic and financial problems as they attempted to establish and maintain their facilities. The losers in all this disorganization and political manipulation during the Bureau's first year of operation were the sick freedmen. They, at times, received poor medical care and ultimately failed to receive assistance in developing medical independence. This situation existed throughout the South. Georgia is only one example. When General William T. Sherman departed Savannah in January 1865 to commence his march northward, the war in Georgiawas unofficially at an end. Governor Joseph E. Brown remained in office until April, however, presiding over the affairs of state as though military defeat and massive property destruction had not demoralized and disrupted the lives of most Georgians. This dislocation was most apparent in the cities and large towns where former slaves—hundreds and thousands of them who had trailed behind Sherman's forces through the state—now remained in expectation of something, though they knew not what. Blacks also began swelling the populations of towns more remote from the path of the Union invaders, especially in the weeks after the official surrender of Georgia to General James H. Wilson in April. With housing, food, and clothing quite scarce even forwhites, and with benevolent masters miles away on remote plantations, the newly freed black people experienced extreme hardships through the cold winter and wet spring months. During the transitional period, when the state and local governments were bankrupt or unwilling to...

The Giza Laboratory is still under the able direction of Rowland P. Wilson; Major F. H. Stewart is the pathologist, while Ahmed Fahmi Abbassi and Abdel Fattah El-Tobgy are assistant pathologist and assistant surgeon, respectively, on the permanent staff. The usual postgraduate instruction was given during 1932, after receiving which candidates for service in the ophthalmic section of the Public Health Service had to pass a primary and a final examination. It is noted that physicians who are graduates of the Faculty of Medicine of the University of Cairo possess a far better knowledge of ophthalmology than those graduated abroad. This may be due to the fact that their education is determined by ophthalmologic features peculiar to Egypt and not necessarily to the fact that a poorer training is received abroad. The Giza Laboratory functions chiefly as a central pathologic laboratory for the 52 government ophthalmic hospitals in

William Taylor was a British army surgeon remembered for his role as deputy inspector of hospitals (DIH) at Waterloo serving under Sir James Grant MD (1778-1852). No biography of Taylor exists beyond his entry in Drew's records of commissioned officers in the medical services of the British Army. Taylor appears to have been a Scotsman and is first noted as a hospital mate in 1795. He joined the 10th Royal Dragoons (Hussars from 1806) as an assistant surgeon in 1797. He is recorded at Guildford (1800) and Brighton (1803). He was made surgeon in August 1803. A further reference to Taylor, deduced from the title of "regimental surgeon," is documented at Lewes, Sussex, in 1808. Taylor served with the 10th Hussars in the Peninsular and Challis' roll call records his service at the Battles of Sahagún (21 December 1808) and Benavente (29 December 1808). Taylor was transferred to the staff on 20 June 1811 and made DIH on 25 July 1811. He was put on half-pay before being reinstated for Waterloo. Taylor retired on half-pay in February 1816 and died at Turnham Green on 9 January 1820. His Waterloo medal was sold in 2006.

Medical organization and surgical practice in air raids. By P. H. Mitchiner, C.B.E., F.R.C.S., Hon. Surgeon to H.M. The King; Surgeon and Lecturer in Surgery, St. Thomas's Hospital; Brigadier, Army Medical Service, D.D.M.S. Command; and E. M. COWELL, C.B., C.B.E., D.S.O., T.D., D.L., M.D., B.S., F.R.C.S., Surgeon, Croydon General Hospital; Brigadier, Army Medical Service, D.D.M.S. Corps. With a Foreword by Sir CUTHBERT, WALLACE, Bt. Second edition. 8 × 5 1/4 in. Pp. 296 + x, with 58 illustrations. 1941. London: J. & A. Churchill Ltd. 12s. 6d. net Get access Medical organization and surgical practice in air raids. By P H Mitchiner, C.B.E., F.R.C.S., Hon. Surgeon to H.M. The King; Surgeon and Lecturer in Surgery, St. Thomas's Hospital; Brigadier, Army Medical Service, D.D.M.S. Command; and E. M. COWELL, C.B., C.B.E., D.S.O., T.D., D.L., M.D., B.S., F.R.C.S., Surgeon, Croydon General Hospital; Brigadier, Army Medical Service, D.D.M.S. Corps. With a Foreword by Sir CUTHBERT, WALLACE, Bt. Second edition. 8 × 5 1/4 in. Pp. 296 + x, with 58 illustrations. 1941. London: J. & A. Churchill Ltd. 12s. 6d. net. British Journal of Surgery, Volume 29, Issue 113, July 1941, Page 159, https://doi.org/10.1002/bjs.18002911320 Published: 05 December 2005

"Sharp, Colonel Alexander Dunstan, (6 Nov. 1870–18 March 1955), Army Medical Service; late Hon. Surgeon to the King; Hon. Colonel 49th W. Riding Div. RAMC (T)" published on by Oxford University Press.

The Army's Medical Service Corps Colonel R. L. Black, MSC Colonel R. L. Black, MSC Chief Medical Service Corps, Department of the Army Search for other works by this author on: Oxford Academic Google Scholar The Military Surgeon, Volume 115, Issue 1, July 1954, Pages 11–13, https://doi.org/10.1093/milmed/115.1.11 Published: 01 July 1954

Hunter, Maj.-Gen. George Douglas, (28 Aug. 1860–15 April 1922), Army Medical Service (retired); Director of Medical Services, British East African Expeditionary Forces, Dec. 1915–March 1918

Can Cyprus overcome its health-care challenges?

The Japanese invasion in 1937 precipitated the most serious military crisis in China since the outbreak of the Taiping Rebellion in 1851. China's armies had only marginal health services incapable of dealing with the Japanese onslaught. Modern army medical service in China began with the founding of the Beiyang Medical College in Tianjin in 1893 and the Beiyang Military Medical Academy in the same city in 1902. By 1936 the Army Medical School had graduated 1,045 physicians and 300 pharmacists, most of whom were serving in the three armed services (army, navy, and air force). The Chinese Red Cross, through its Medical Relief Corps (MRC), played a unique role in the early years of the War of Resistance. It provided a way to overcome the resistance of educated youth to war work and bring their patriotism and skills to the aid of front-line soldiers.Keywords: army medical service; Chinese Red Cross; Japanese invasion; medical relief corps (MRC)

Royal Navy and Army Medical Services

Royal Navy and Army Medical Services

The critical task of the physician uniting effective surgical intervention within close proximity to the front lines, and therefore the wounded, must be matched with the challenge of not becoming a casualty as well. The U.S. Army Medical Services during the Korean War balanced the surgeon's ability to protect himself and save others. This article tells the story of perhaps one of the most characteristically highlighted medical aspects of the Korean War, the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital. Originally intended to be close to the front lines of fighting, the Mobile Army Surgical Hospital was equipped to move on its own. Initially, the unit was formed to provide surgical capabilities for one division. It transformed through the course of the war into a multidivision and multinational all-purpose hospital. With this expansion in workload (medical cases in addition to surgery) without an equitable increase in personnel, rapid evacuation of patients was the only means of keeping up.

ARMY MEDICAL SERVICE,: 13, St. James's-pluce