Historic veterinary care

Belle_91 · Jun 13, 2010

My story takes place in Salem, MA in 1692 during the infamous witch trials. I was going to have my mc find a stray cat (I also don't know if I should make the cat black or not. At first I thought that would be cheesy, but then I was reading up on it and apparently people back then were very skeptical of black cats in particular).

Anyways, what I was going to have happen was that she sees a cat with some sort of wound on its leg ie dog bite? Cat got in a fight with another feline? Still haven't decided. But what I was wondering was what sort of treatment could my mc provide to the animal. She is a servant for one, and obviously people back then couldn't take the animal to a shelter or know that they need to clean the wound to prevent infection. I was thinking that she would treat the wound like she would treat a humans, but i don't know how people did that either.

Anyways, any addvice would be helpful

veinglory · Jun 13, 2010

In that era, not a lot. But even now it is mainly a matter of keeping the animal clean, warn and safe and letting them heal.

alleycat · Jun 13, 2010

People probably used a salve of some sort for wounds (I'm no expert on the time period).

I've heard that the Indians used to cauterize wounds, then apply a salve. I'd hate to hold a cat down and do that however.

Belle_91 · Jun 13, 2010

So I guess she'd scrub him down with lye soap? Did they even know to keep the wound clean back then? All of the books about the Puritans/colonists only talk about the spread of small pox and what not

Is it also cheesy to use the whole black cat thing? Should I make the cat's coat a different shade

veinglory · Jun 13, 2010

Its kind of hard to keep anything on a cat, let alone before the invention of vetwrap. I think cleaning them off with a damp cloth would work as well as anything. With cats less is often best.

History_Chick · Jun 13, 2010

My uncle told me this once..

"animals came. They lived and then died."

He was making a comment on how in today's world we take our animals to the vet for every little thing. He grew up in the 50s which wasn't that long ago, if you think about it. I can only guess that a cat would be viewed the same way. The child may want to keep it and try to make the animal better, but the father would think of it as a nuisance that needed to be taken care of..killed.

Deleted member 42 · Jun 13, 2010

Bald's Leech Book, and Old English pre tenth century medical manual includes remedies for people as well as cats, dogs, sheeps, goats, cows, pigs and horses.

There are Welsh and Irish vet manuals from the 12th through the 16th centuries.

The Salem trials include testimony about "witch craft" cures as well as curses for livestock and animals.

pdr · Jun 14, 2010

And still used...

today is comfrey. A poultice made from leaves, or an ointment made from goose fat and the root.

May I politely ask if the people of Salem approved of cats? I thought they were regarded back then as witches' familiars?

angeliz2k · Jun 14, 2010

I'm fairly certain that the good people of Salem would have been aware of basic concepts. People did understand that you need to clean wounds. Your character would probably do that first, and maybe, like pdr said, a poultice.

pdr, the witch hysteria was only for a few months in 1692. At any other time, cats would have been . . . cats, and unlikely to cause much comment I think. Black cats might have been viewed with a bit of suspicion, however. If I'm not mistaken, the familiars often took the form of birds according to the accusers.

Are we in the throes of the accusations, History Gal? Or is it before the trials began? If the trials are going on right then, it probably would have been very dangerous to go around making friends with black cats. Especially if you had an enemy in town named Mercy Lewis or Abigail Williams or Ann Putname (Jr or Sr).

Belle_91 · Jun 14, 2010

haha funny you should mention Mercy Lewis and Anne Putnam angel. My mc is actually the Putnams indentured servant...talk about drama. She arrives in Salem in the fall of 1691, so is there when the accusations begin. She's even there when the girls themselves practice witchcraft themselves.

The cat is going to be a stray that she secretly takes care of. I read in Tituba's confession that she mentioned being "tormented" by red cats and birds. Yes, I am going to have my mc be eventually accussed of witchcraft when she threatens to tell on the girls who were having their fortunes read in the Parris household. The cat will obviously come into play there.

Should I make it black or would like a calico be ok? I just don't want people to think its cheesy or too cliche.

autumnleaf · Jun 14, 2010

angeliz2k said:
I'm fairly certain that the good people of Salem would have been aware of basic concepts. People did understand that you need to clean wounds. Your character would probably do that first, and maybe, like pdr said, a poultice.

Would they really have known to clean wounds in a pre-germ-theory era? In the 19th century, doctors were very resistant to the idea of washing their hands. I'm genuinely curious about whether a 17th century servant would wash a wound.

Belle_91 · Jun 16, 2010

I would really like to know autumn's question as well

angeliz2k · Jun 16, 2010

Well, someone can correct me if I'm wrong, but I'm pretty sure that no matter what time period you're in, if you see a bleeding or nasty wound, your first reaction would be to get a damp cloth and clean it up.

People weren't afraid of being clean exactly; they just thought it was unhealthy to take baths too often. This doesn't mean they didn't wash their hands before eating (they did) or wash their faces (they did).

But by the 17th century, I don't think there was quite the stigma against baths that there was in, say, the 16th century.

I'm not a Puritan expert. But they do seem like one set of people who would put some store by clealiness.

However, I think I'm getting off topic. In my humble opinion, it would only make sense for her to clean up the wound to the best of her ability.

pdr · Jun 16, 2010

Nope!

but I'm pretty sure that no matter what time period you're in, if you see a bleeding or nasty wound, your first reaction would be to get a damp cloth and clean it up.

That's a modern mind set!
We need Sirius for her medical research.

But I do know in the 17thC right up to when I was a little girl, a bleeding cut often had cobwebs wrapped round it. Historically a really bad bleeding wound would be cauterised. Instead of cobwebs a poultice of herbs and/or bran plus herbs could be applied.

Actually it was John Wesley who said 'Cleanliness is next to Godliness'. Puritans were not generally into more washing than the norm The Quakers and Shakers were though.

mccardey · Jun 16, 2010

I know that Ignaz Semmelweis was instrumental in making the connection between handwashing and doctors spreading puerperal fever (in childbed). He made the connection in the 1840s but it didn't really take off till after his death.

Does that help?

(Anyone who loves gory medical history should read Sherwin Nuland's "The Doctor's Plague". Gripping stuff

)

And yes, the issue in earlier times - as PDR says - was more about stopping the bleeding than cleaning the wound. 's why for the most part people were fine with reusing bandages - unwashed.

Sirius · Jun 17, 2010

Yes, seconding mccardey. Poor old Semmelweiz ended up being committed as a madman (I think, to be fair, his treatment by the medical profession had indeed triggered severe depression) and died nine days after his committal to an asylum, ironically of septacaemia.

He noted that of the two maternity wards in the Vienna public hospital one had rates of puerpural fever up to ten times that of the other. The patients had noticed; they were even giving birth in the street to avoid being sent to the 'bad' ward. The bad ward was served by doctors, the good ward by midwives. What Semmelweiz (before the germ theory of disease) worked out was that doctors were going from autopsies to treat patients on the maternity ward without even washing their hands; he instituted compulsory washing in a soda solution and death rates dropped. As a result, he was run out of the profession for daring to suggest his fellow practitioners were 'unclean'.

autumnleaf · Jun 17, 2010

Semmelwiez is one of my heros, ever since I saw a documentary about him.

Shakesbear · Jun 17, 2010

Would there be a sort of herbalist/wise wo/man who would know how to treat such wounds?

Cats have a bad rep - but many were prized for their rat/mouse catching skills. Vermin were sometimes responsible for destroying stores of village food and grains. The Earl of Southampton had his cat with him when he was imprisoned in HM Tower of London ... see here:
http://www.joh.cam.ac.uk/library/sp...oks/pix/provenance/crashaw/Catinprison[1].jpg

Belle_91 · Jun 17, 2010

Ok I think I'll just have the mc put some bandages on the kitty along with some herbs. Would herbs help stop an infection? I was going to have the feline get bit by a dog or some type of animal and I know if you don't throughly clean out the wound it can get infected and pretty nasty.

pdr · Jun 18, 2010

Er...

actually it was believed that a wound growing mould and puss was healing itself and best left alone. There is some evidence for this.

During WWII in some of the Japanese concentration camps or prisoner of war camps there was no medical treatment given. Those too weak to try and wash and clean their wounds - when there wasn't a good water supply - often survived. Their wounds apparently grew some kind of penicillin mould and healed themselves. Those who tried to wash and clean their wounds with the doubtful water actually had more problems and more infections and amputations.

Remember we have purified water supplies. Water was not regarded as healthy until the 20thC. And yes, pure springs did exist and were venerated! But rivers and streams were used as sewers and rubbish disposal conduits for most of history, just as they are today!

A herbal bandage? Large comfrey leaf to wrap a poultice of mallow, heal all and thyme onto the wound.

mccardey · Jun 18, 2010

During WWII in some of the Japanese concentration camps

You know what else? On the Burma railway, they were always glad if they were near water with fish in it. Because - apart from eating the fish - if you have a tropical ulcer on your foot and stick it in the water the dear little fishies will come and eat all the rot and infection away. Eventually.

pdr, I'm not sure you and I shouldn't become Best Friends.... (also autumnleaf because she loves Sememlweiz)

Sirius · Jun 18, 2010

I'm fairly sure that the use of maggots to clean out wounds which comes out in Sharpe stems from the same thinking.

pdr · Jun 18, 2010

And...

haven't doctors discovered that those same rather specialized maggots also are the best cure for that revolting new infection which eats one alive?

Kitti · Jun 20, 2010

I know that Ignaz Semmelweis was instrumental in making the connection between handwashing and doctors spreading puerperal fever (in childbed).

Early modern midwives knew to do that, too, just not the university trained (read: book-trained) physicians. Only after the invention of the forceps did things get really bad for women in childbirth.

But back to the original question - everything I've read about early modern veterinary medicine argues that it was based on the exact same principles as human medicine and used the same types of cures (just with cheaper ingredients, e.g. beer instead of wine as a base for other ingredients). Beloved family pets, like dogs, usually get better care, on par with the humans of the household.

There were farriers and professional leeches who had special training to treat the bigger animals, especially horses, but anyone who was a primary caretaker of animals (husbandmen, farmers, shepherds, herdsmen) would know practical lore. Women, in particular, were usually responsible for the small animals in their household and would have a host of remedies learned through experience and through friends/family to heal them. Some of them had recipe books of popular remedies, but remedies could also be found in cookbooks and the yearly almanacs, if your MC is literate and could sneak a peek at her mistress's books.

If you can get your hands on a e-book copy of anything by Nicholas Culpepper, he's the one who published all the popular remedy books; he was reprinted constantly throughout the 17th century.

mccardey · Jun 20, 2010

Early modern midwives knew to do that, too, just not the university trained (read: book-trained) physicians.

Yes, that's right, women were safer. It was the doctors spreading the fever I was talking about. As Sirius said

The bad ward was served by doctors, the good ward by midwives. What Semmelweiz (before the germ theory of disease) worked out was that doctors were going from autopsies to treat patients on the maternity ward without even washing their hands;

I'm not sure if the women were washing their hands more, or just better because they weren't doing autopsies first, but there'd be a reason why humanity survived all those years of un-book-trained midwife deliveries and I'm betting it's hygiene...

Historic veterinary care

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book

veinglory

volitare nequeo

alleycat

Still around

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book

veinglory

volitare nequeo

History_Chick

Deleted member 42

pdr

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book

autumnleaf

practical experience, FTW

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book

angeliz2k

never mind the shorty

pdr

mccardey

Sirius

autumnleaf

practical experience, FTW

Shakesbear

knows a hawk from a handsaw

Belle_91

With her nose stuck in a book

pdr

mccardey

Sirius

pdr

Kitti

procrastinatrix

mccardey