29 research outputs found
Response by P Pells to Discussion by Koutsoftas "Rock Quality Designation (RQD): Time to Rest in Peace"
Get PDFResponse by P Pells to Discussion by Koutsoftas "Rock Quality Designation: Time to Rest in Peace"The accepted manuscript in pdf format is listed with the files at the bottom of this page. The presentation of the authors' names and (or) special characters in the title of the manuscript may differ slightly between what is listed on this page and what is listed in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript; that in the pdf file of the accepted manuscript is what was submitted by the author
Ground-breaking pioneers or dangerous amateurs? Did early-modern surgery have any basis in medical science?
Get PDFReassessing frontline medical practitioners of the British civil wars in the context of the seventeenth-century medical world
Get PDFThis is the author accepted manuscript. The final version is available from Cambridge University Press via the DOI in this recordMedical provision in Civil War armies has generally suffered a poor reputation. Medical matters have been excluded from assessments of how far Civil War armies confirm evidence of the so-called ‘Military Revolution’, whilst Harold Cook argued that it was not until after the Glorious Revolution that the medical infrastructure of the armed forces was brought in line with continental practices, particularly those of the Dutch army. Despite the recent rehabilitation of early modern practitioners elsewhere, frontline military practitioners continue to be dismissed as uneducated, unskilful and incompetent. This is largely due to the lack of a fresh perspective since C. H. Firth published Cromwell's Army in 1902. This article argues that the English were well aware of current medical practice in European armies and endeavoured to implement similar procedures during the Civil Wars. Indeed, almost all the developments identified by Cook for the later seventeenth century can be found in Civil War armies. Whilst failures may have occurred, most of these can be attributed to administrative and financial miscarriages, rather than ignorance of contemporary medical developments. Moreover, there is little to suggest that medics mobilized for Civil War armies were any less capable than those who practised civilian medicine in this period.This article draws on research undertaken whilst a postdoctoral research associate on the Wellcome Trust-funded project ‘The Medical World of Early Modern England, Wales and Ireland, c. 1500–1715’ at the University of Exeter (grant reference number 097782/Z/11/Z)
‘Stout Skippon hath a wound’: the medical treatment of Parliament’s infantry commander following the battle of Naseby
No full text
