Nelson & His World

In view of the interesting discussion on the 'Hospital Ships' thread, I thought I would open a new thread on the medicine and surgery of 'our' period, with particular reference to the navy.

I have just come across a letter by Dr Blane - mentioned on the 'Hospital Ships' thread, in which he asks permission of the Royal Society to 'take a copy of the paper on Borax, sent by my brother from India and read at the last meeting of the Society.'

My grandmother always had borax in her household stores for use in laundering, and washing china, and sometimes as a freshener in rubbish bins etc.

I wonder if it also had medicinal uses in the eighteenth century; as a disinfectant perhaps? The causes of sepsis were unknown, but perhaps they knew from experience that borax was a preventative or an effective treatment for infection? Can anyone comment?

It certainly seems to have been used as a disinfectant - see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Boric_acid

Many thanks for the link, Chasbaz.

I have done a little more 'Googling' and have found a reference to the paper by Dr Blane's brother, William.

This appeared in the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London, Vol. 7, pp 297-300. However, it is concerned with 'some particulars relative to the production of borax' and doesn't seem to be about its medicinal properties at all. I'd be interested to know, though, whether it was used as a disinfectant by doctors in Nelson's navy.

I am reading an interesting book on Trafalgar Square at the moment: Trafalgar Square: a visual history of London's landmark by Jean Hood, Chrysalis Books 2005 ISBN 0 7134 8967 7

It is full of information totally new to me. I read, for example, that contention over who or what to place on the empty fourth plinth is nothing new. Originally the plan was that Nelson should be accompanied by statues of other naval and military heroes. However, a statue of Dr Jenner, the great physician and discoverer of vaccination, was finally chosen and approved by Queen Victoria. Many felt that the Square should be kept for military heroes, not doctors, and after much pressure, Jenner was relocated four years later to Kensington Gardens. By this time, the Queen was in deep mourning for Prince Albert and could not be enlisted in support of Jenner's remaining in Trafalgar Square. The satirical magazine 'Punch' published a wry little quatrain on the subject:

'England's ingratitude still blots
The escutcheon of the brave and free;
I saved you many million spots
And now you grudge one spot for me.'

I have just finished reading 'Poseidon: a personal study of Admiral Lord Nelson' by Renalt Capes - a short and fairly lightweight work (first published in 1947) that has several glaring errors together with some interesting insights and new (to me, at any rate) information.

On the plans for the polar expedition that Nelson took part in as a youngster, he says:

The expedition was carefully and thoroughly planned; two ships, the Carcass and the Racehorse, were employed, both being especially strengthened to withstand the pressure of ice. For the first time in naval history 'water distillers' were carried. These simple contrivances consisted of an extension from the ship's kettle, against which wet mops were held in the flow of steam, thirty-four to forty gallons of water [about 190 litres max, I think] being obtained daily. This primitive but effective apparatus was invented by Doctor Irving, who was surgeon to the party.'

Was Dr Irving's invention adopted widely in Nelson's navy? A supply of fresh, clean water is vital to health and well-being, of course, and I have been under the impression that finding supplies was a perennial problem for ships at sea. 40 gallons isn't much for a crew of possibly several hundred, but better than nothing. Any comments?

Tycho,

The answer is yes, Doctor Irving's invention was developed and a later example of his invention can be seen today in the Brodie stove on board the Victory and patented in 1780.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/levork/230 ... 017272812/

I have googled around a bit, but this is the best shot I can find. If you look on top of the stove, to the right, you will see a copper tube. This is the large end of a tapering cylinder, in fact a condenser which was connected with water boilers in the stove, and which produced warm desalinated water.

It probably wouldn't have produced that much, certainly not enough for the whole crew but would have done for some of the officers and, more importantly, the occupants of the sick berth which was situated on the upper deck above and forward.

Thanks, Kester.

Looks a bit like my Aga - might be fun to rig up a couple of mops and watch the action.

The distiller from another angle:
http://www.mc.vanderbilt.edu/biolib/hc/ ... book2.html

And for the bibliophile:
http://www.baumanrarebooks.com/rare-boo ... 71066.aspx

I've just come across this interesting article on a restored naval hospital in Mahon, Minorca, tucked away in the 'Register' pages of today's Times.


http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_a ... 834589.ece

I picked up a copy recently of 'The Saturday Magazine' dated 25th October 1834. It is a curious little publication, published 'under the direction of the Committee of General Literature and Education, appointed by the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge'. The SPCK is still active today in publishing Christian literature.

I bought the magazine because it had a piece on Nelson - pretty unremarkable, just a eulogistic summary of his life. The other pieces are varied - titbits offering spiritual uplift, essays on whirlwinds and waterspouts at sea, on Salisbury Cathedral and on Sugar as Food for Animals, which contains the following observation:

'That dreadful malady, once so prevalent on shipboard, scurvy, has been completely and instantaneously stopped, by putting the afflicted on a sugar diet.'

It seems bizarre that anyone could make such a claim as late as 1834 when it was well proven that an adequate intake of vitamin C was the way to prevent and cure scurvy.

The article continues: 'As to the unfounded assertion of its [sugar] injuring the teeth, let those who make it visit the sugar-plantations, and look at the Negroes and their children, whose teeth are daily employed in the matication of sugar, and they will be convinced of the absurdity of the statement.'

Anna,

I agree, it seems rather a strange assertion to attribute the cure of scurvy to the taking of sugar and certainly by 1834, when the researches of James Lind and others had long since found that lemons were the most effective cure against it. I believe the daily intake of lemon juice in the RN can be dated to around 1795.

As to the second part of his statement, is he sure of his facts? I presume he actually means 'mastication', but how often would a negro slave on the plantations be allowed to eat, or would want to eat, sugar? I would have thought that the good condition of the slaves' teeth, was actually was down to them NOT eating sugar, perhaps wisely leaving it to the plantation owners and their customers, the Europeans, to acquire rotting teeth! I seem to remember that in more recent times, dentists and others have also stated that the teeth of negros and coloureds in Europe have deteriorated far quicker there than at any othertime in their existence – very likely starting from the time large numbers of them settled and, in the process, acquired our bad habits!

Which reminds me, I must go to the dentist...

Sorry for the typo - I meant 'mastication' of course!

Another bizarre 'remedy' in the 18th century was the one mentioned by Midshipman Millard's mother (on the Millard thread) when she asks if he has drunk any seawater for his sore eyes, as well as washing his eyes with it. Well, a saline solution for bathing sore eyes is one thing, but drinking the stuff, except maybe as an emetic, is another. I wondered whether this was seaman's lore that no lubber would give credence to, but a little Googlng turned up an article in a learned journal 'The North Sea Culture 1550-1800' by Juliette Roding and Lex Heerma van Voss, (Uitgeverig Verloren 1996):

'Drinking seawater was considered a cure for illnesses as different as cancer and mental illness.' It was often prescribed by doctors, in addition to sea bathing.

Doctors, eh? Why do we listen to them?

I'm looking at this box of organic whole unrefined evaporated sugar cane juice sugar. I don't know what sugar processing involved in the 1830s, but one teaspoon of this stuff provides 2% of a 60mg RDA of Vitamin C. (This RDA is frequently cited but has been quite debunked as nowhere near enough, never mind that men, women, smokers, etc. all have different requirements. But at least it's a reference point.) Check the math, but I think this means that one could get a Vitamin C intake marginally adequate to prevent scurvy by eating a little over a cup of such sugar a day. My pancreas hurts just thinking about it. I vote for the fresh food.

Not to be a cynic, but did the "Saturday Magazine"/SPCK have ties to the sugar industry I wonder?

Fiddler - you're a mine of esoteric information!!

I thought sugar was 100% carbohydrate. That's what comes of listening to today's medical propaganda instead of reading the packet. Well, we live and learn. Sugar to cure scurvy - and no damage to your teeth!

Do you remember that interesting PM you sent me a little while ago about variable rates of vitamin C depletion? I wonder whether you'd like to post the information here?

Your query about the SPCK is an interesting one and worth following up.

Anna/FIddler,

It seems as though there might be a 'grain' of truth in it after all, then, but enough to effect a cure?

Anna,

Your reference to drinking seawater reminded me that I have inadvertently imbibed a few gulps myself, back in my sailing days - but can't say that I ever noticed any good effects to my eyes or my health in general! Some survival experts say that those unfortunate enough to experience having had their vessel founder at sea and then have to take to the liferaft, subsequently experiencing a lack of fresh water, might have survived, or survived better, if their bodies had become used to their drinking sea water. Apparently it they had drunk salt water daily in small quantities from the beginning of the voyage, when they were later deprived of fresh they might the more easily have been able to drink it as their bodies would have become used to its acceptance.

I suppose there might be some truth in that too, although I guess the problem would then be to know, unless you were addicted to the stuff, on which voyage your vessel was going to go down – in which case you would avoid putting to sea so that the problem wouldn't arise!