Academia.eduAcademia.edu

Outline

Title
Abstract
Key Takeaways
Figures
References
FAQs
All Topics
History
History of Medicine

The Rise and Fall of the Army Medical Museum and Library

Profile image of Michael RhodeMichael Rhode

2006, Washington History

visibility

…

description

19 pages

Abstract
sparkles

AI

The paper discusses the history and evolution of the Army Medical Museum and Library, established during the Civil War as a response to the urgent medical needs of the Union Army. It outlines the museum's dual roles in research and public education, highlighting significant developments, challenges it faced, and its contributions to medical science. The text also covers the transition from a collection of curiosities to a comprehensive medical repository, its impact on military medicine, and the lasting legacy it leaves in the field of healthcare.

Key takeaways
sparkles

AI

  1. The Army Medical Museum, founded in 1862, aimed to research and exhibit military medical practices.
  2. John Shaw Billings transformed the museum into a national institution and expanded its collections significantly.
  3. By 1888, the museum housed over 15,000 specimens and became a public attraction, drawing 40,000 visitors annually.
  4. World War I shifted the museum's focus towards pathology, diminishing its role in traditional medical education.
  5. In 1988, the museum was renamed the National Museum of Health and Medicine, reflecting its evolving mission.
Figures (14)
The museum’s first home was in Brinton’s room. in the Surgeon General’s Office. “The beginning of the Museum in August 1862 was very modest,” recalled Brinton, “consisting of three dried and vatnished specimens placed on the little shelf above the ink stand on the desk of the recently appointed curator. These were duly inspected and admired by the office officials and . . . surgeons on duty in and around the city. ‘How is the Museum?’ was the joking question of the day.”* On August 1, 1862, Surgeon General Hammond gave Brinton the resources and authority to collect new speci- mens, especially specimens saved in military hospitals by interested surgeons. “Should any medical officer of the Army decline or neglect to furnish such preparations for the Museum,” wrote Hammond, “you will report the name of such offi- cer to this office.” WT care Sellen erred tery thie narder ‘Riedeviirga manerey and not published until after his death, Brinton described his pleasure at being assigned to work on this new educational institution. “The order ... to me, was the first step towards really put- ting this notion of an Army Museum into shape, and was a most welcome duty. My whole heart was in the Museum and I felt that if the officers in the field and those~in charge of hospitals, could only be fairly interested, its growth would be rapid as the future good of such a grand national cabinet would be immense. By it the results of the surgery of this war would be pre- served for all time, and the education of future generations of military surgeons would be greatly assisted.”®
The museum’s first home was in Brinton’s room. in the Surgeon General’s Office. “The beginning of the Museum in August 1862 was very modest,” recalled Brinton, “consisting of three dried and vatnished specimens placed on the little shelf above the ink stand on the desk of the recently appointed curator. These were duly inspected and admired by the office officials and . . . surgeons on duty in and around the city. ‘How is the Museum?’ was the joking question of the day.”* On August 1, 1862, Surgeon General Hammond gave Brinton the resources and authority to collect new speci- mens, especially specimens saved in military hospitals by interested surgeons. “Should any medical officer of the Army decline or neglect to furnish such preparations for the Museum,” wrote Hammond, “you will report the name of such offi- cer to this office.” WT care Sellen erred tery thie narder ‘Riedeviirga manerey and not published until after his death, Brinton described his pleasure at being assigned to work on this new educational institution. “The order ... to me, was the first step towards really put- ting this notion of an Army Museum into shape, and was a most welcome duty. My whole heart was in the Museum and I felt that if the officers in the field and those~in charge of hospitals, could only be fairly interested, its growth would be rapid as the future good of such a grand national cabinet would be immense. By it the results of the surgery of this war would be pre- served for all time, and the education of future generations of military surgeons would be greatly assisted.”®
82 © Washington History 2006 Specimens preserved in alcohol, like this 1864 colon, are still available in toclay’s museum.
82 © Washington History 2006 Specimens preserved in alcohol, like this 1864 colon, are still available in toclay’s museum.
Surgeon General William Hammond established the museum in 1862. The museum had no difficulty attracting the public. Medical specimens, including many anomalies and curiosities, fascinated both lay and professional visitors alike. No doubt part of the fascination lay in the innate morbid curiosity of seeing human remains usually available in circus side-shows, but the Civil War had just ended, and the displays of specimens from maimed soldiers of both sides led visitors to see the museum as an unintentional national memorial. The glass cases of specimens were flanked by flags and standards of ambulance corps as well as Union and Confed- erate swords and sabers. While the displays were systematic, rather than artistic, they were nonetheless alluring, especially for thrill-seekers. A reporter for the popular Appleton’s Journal cap- tured the atmosphere:
Surgeon General William Hammond established the museum in 1862. The museum had no difficulty attracting the public. Medical specimens, including many anomalies and curiosities, fascinated both lay and professional visitors alike. No doubt part of the fascination lay in the innate morbid curiosity of seeing human remains usually available in circus side-shows, but the Civil War had just ended, and the displays of specimens from maimed soldiers of both sides led visitors to see the museum as an unintentional national memorial. The glass cases of specimens were flanked by flags and standards of ambulance corps as well as Union and Confed- erate swords and sabers. While the displays were systematic, rather than artistic, they were nonetheless alluring, especially for thrill-seekers. A reporter for the popular Appleton’s Journal cap- tured the atmosphere:
cine,” opined guidebook author Mary Clemmer Ames in 1874, “but to the unscientific mind, espe- cially to one still aching with the memories of war, it must remain a museum of horrors. ... No! the Museum is a very interesting, but can never be a popular place to visit.”!® In spite, or because, of Ames’s concerns, by 1874, the number of visitors sometimes reached more than 2,600 per month, even the museum was only open from 10 am to 3 pm on weekdays, and on Saturday from 10 am to 2 pm.!° As early as 1866, the museum was well- known enough to be mentioned in Atlantic Monthly. In Dr. S. Weir Mitchell’s fictional story, “The Case of George Dedlow,” the hero, who lost both legs due to the war, was contacted by spirits during a séance. The spirits proved to be his amputated limbs, preserved in the Medical Museum: “A strange sense of wonder filled [Ded- low], and, to the amazement of every one, I arose, and, staggering a little, walked across the room on limbs invisible to them or me. Jt was no wonder | bluish tinge, the blanched skeletons and grin- ning skulls—the same moon that saw, in many a case, the death-blow given, or the bullet pierce. The thought is not a comforting one, and those fancies would not be calculated, at such a time, to inspire courage. But in broad daylight, with the sun shining outside, and brightening up, with its tinge of life and activ- ity, the tessellated floor, with the noise and traffic of the street outside, and the hum and murmur of numerous clerks and attendants inside, even those of timid proclivities do not then hesitate to inspect closely and with curios- ity the objects which, twelve hours later, when the building is dark and deserted, they would scarce care to approach.!?
cine,” opined guidebook author Mary Clemmer Ames in 1874, “but to the unscientific mind, espe- cially to one still aching with the memories of war, it must remain a museum of horrors. ... No! the Museum is a very interesting, but can never be a popular place to visit.”!® In spite, or because, of Ames’s concerns, by 1874, the number of visitors sometimes reached more than 2,600 per month, even the museum was only open from 10 am to 3 pm on weekdays, and on Saturday from 10 am to 2 pm.!° As early as 1866, the museum was well- known enough to be mentioned in Atlantic Monthly. In Dr. S. Weir Mitchell’s fictional story, “The Case of George Dedlow,” the hero, who lost both legs due to the war, was contacted by spirits during a séance. The spirits proved to be his amputated limbs, preserved in the Medical Museum: “A strange sense of wonder filled [Ded- low], and, to the amazement of every one, I arose, and, staggering a little, walked across the room on limbs invisible to them or me. Jt was no wonder | bluish tinge, the blanched skeletons and grin- ning skulls—the same moon that saw, in many a case, the death-blow given, or the bullet pierce. The thought is not a comforting one, and those fancies would not be calculated, at such a time, to inspire courage. But in broad daylight, with the sun shining outside, and brightening up, with its tinge of life and activ- ity, the tessellated floor, with the noise and traffic of the street outside, and the hum and murmur of numerous clerks and attendants inside, even those of timid proclivities do not then hesitate to inspect closely and with curios- ity the objects which, twelve hours later, when the building is dark and deserted, they would scarce care to approach.!?
In addition to the museum and its visitors, Woodward and Otis both oversaw large offices responsible for the medical records of the war. Otis was in charge of the Division of Surgical Records, while Woodward headed the Record and Pension Division. On the first floor, Woodward's division kept wartime military hospital records as well as sick-reports from the field. The commis- sioner of pensions decided pension claims based on these records as official evidence of the cause of death or nature of disability. On the second floor, alongside the Surgeon General’s Library, Otis kept the records used to prepare the surgical history of the war.2! The exhibit halls of the “museum of horrors,” as illustrated in Mary Clemmer Ames’s 1874 guidebook.
In addition to the museum and its visitors, Woodward and Otis both oversaw large offices responsible for the medical records of the war. Otis was in charge of the Division of Surgical Records, while Woodward headed the Record and Pension Division. On the first floor, Woodward's division kept wartime military hospital records as well as sick-reports from the field. The commis- sioner of pensions decided pension claims based on these records as official evidence of the cause of death or nature of disability. On the second floor, alongside the Surgeon General’s Library, Otis kept the records used to prepare the surgical history of the war.2! The exhibit halls of the “museum of horrors,” as illustrated in Mary Clemmer Ames’s 1874 guidebook.
Without modern medicine, amputation was the only recourse for thousands of wounded during the war. Here Columbus Rush poses with his two artificial legs, 1866.
Without modern medicine, amputation was the only recourse for thousands of wounded during the war. Here Columbus Rush poses with his two artificial legs, 1866.
1888, the library had 5,000 readers.” In his annual message to Congress, President Ruther- ford Hayes asked for an appropriation to replace the building, asserting that “the collection of books, specimens, and records constituting the Army Medical Museum and Library are of national importance. Their destruction would be an irreparable loss not only to the United States but to the world.” Surgeon General Barnes, not- ing that the library had 51,500 volumes and 57,000 pamphlets, and the Museum had 22,000 specimens, said that the collections had moved beyond their foundations in military medicine, and “have proved to have manifold uses in con- nection with the general progress of medical science in the United States, especially in rela- tions to the public health uses which are perhaps of equal importance to the nation.” The Ameri- can Medical Association formed a committee to lobby Congress for a new building, while Billings contacted physicians in the districts of relevant congressmen, urging their support.24
1888, the library had 5,000 readers.” In his annual message to Congress, President Ruther- ford Hayes asked for an appropriation to replace the building, asserting that “the collection of books, specimens, and records constituting the Army Medical Museum and Library are of national importance. Their destruction would be an irreparable loss not only to the United States but to the world.” Surgeon General Barnes, not- ing that the library had 51,500 volumes and 57,000 pamphlets, and the Museum had 22,000 specimens, said that the collections had moved beyond their foundations in military medicine, and “have proved to have manifold uses in con- nection with the general progress of medical science in the United States, especially in rela- tions to the public health uses which are perhaps of equal importance to the nation.” The Ameri- can Medical Association formed a committee to lobby Congress for a new building, while Billings contacted physicians in the districts of relevant congressmen, urging their support.24
The Records and Pension Division occupied the central portion of the first floor. The east wing contained museum functions, including a photo- graphic darkroom, a dissecting room, an anatomist’s room, a post hospital’s equipment, and a room for genitourinary specimens considered unsuitable for public display. The main display wing of the museum and the stacks of the library occupied the second floor, with library offices and treading rooms in the central section. The third floor had offices, a microscopy room, and an anthropometry laboratory as well as the museum’s balcony gallery. The fourth floor of the central section housed a photographic gallery and store- rooms, two of which held ambulances and litters. The project came in under ‘budget; the surplus was used to build an annex in the courtyard for the steam boilers, pathological laboratories, and bath- rooms. The building used natural light in the exhibit halls and gas light in the offices, and was heated by fireplaces and radiators,?? con my I . i hE 7 7 7 7 1 a i
The Records and Pension Division occupied the central portion of the first floor. The east wing contained museum functions, including a photo- graphic darkroom, a dissecting room, an anatomist’s room, a post hospital’s equipment, and a room for genitourinary specimens considered unsuitable for public display. The main display wing of the museum and the stacks of the library occupied the second floor, with library offices and treading rooms in the central section. The third floor had offices, a microscopy room, and an anthropometry laboratory as well as the museum’s balcony gallery. The fourth floor of the central section housed a photographic gallery and store- rooms, two of which held ambulances and litters. The project came in under ‘budget; the surplus was used to build an annex in the courtyard for the steam boilers, pathological laboratories, and bath- rooms. The building used natural light in the exhibit halls and gas light in the offices, and was heated by fireplaces and radiators,?? con my I . i hE 7 7 7 7 1 a i
The exhibit space and gallery, filled with specimens. direction by collecting and exhibiting the mate- rial culture of medicine. Billings focused on human anatomy and embryology, pathology, numismatics, ethnography and physical anthro- pology, comparative anatomy, specimen preparation, and the development of the micro- scope. At the same time he illustrated the work of the Army Medical Department. Towards the end of his tenure, he collected medical instruments and military artifacts, including equipment and supplies, especially those of foreign armies. These new collections were an attempt to build a national medical museum with a broad encyclo- pedic reach.*? Museum staff, especially Dr. William Gray, provided pathological diagnoses for Army physicians—setting the stage for the even- tual transformation of the Army Medical Museum into the Army Institute of Pathology and later, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. sonian enabled the organizations to work even more closely together. The new space also enabled Billings to aggressively expand the collections. In addition to illustrating “the effects, both immedi- ate and remote, of wounds and of the disease that prevailed in the Army,” he looked specifically to obtain “specimens to illustrate the methods of work of the best anatomists, physiologists and pathologists of Europe.”2° He had the surgeon general issue to Army doctors an extensive wish list with 24 categories including “abnormities [sic]” and “deformities,”*! Billings developed the museum’s comparative and human anatomy col- lections along with its anthropological ones, but also moved the museum in a more “historical”
The exhibit space and gallery, filled with specimens. direction by collecting and exhibiting the mate- rial culture of medicine. Billings focused on human anatomy and embryology, pathology, numismatics, ethnography and physical anthro- pology, comparative anatomy, specimen preparation, and the development of the micro- scope. At the same time he illustrated the work of the Army Medical Department. Towards the end of his tenure, he collected medical instruments and military artifacts, including equipment and supplies, especially those of foreign armies. These new collections were an attempt to build a national medical museum with a broad encyclo- pedic reach.*? Museum staff, especially Dr. William Gray, provided pathological diagnoses for Army physicians—setting the stage for the even- tual transformation of the Army Medical Museum into the Army Institute of Pathology and later, the Armed Forces Institute of Pathology. sonian enabled the organizations to work even more closely together. The new space also enabled Billings to aggressively expand the collections. In addition to illustrating “the effects, both immedi- ate and remote, of wounds and of the disease that prevailed in the Army,” he looked specifically to obtain “specimens to illustrate the methods of work of the best anatomists, physiologists and pathologists of Europe.”2° He had the surgeon general issue to Army doctors an extensive wish list with 24 categories including “abnormities [sic]” and “deformities,”*! Billings developed the museum’s comparative and human anatomy col- lections along with its anthropological ones, but also moved the museum in a more “historical”
In white coats, Dr. John Neate (left) and Dr. F.F. Russell of the museum test their successfu typhoid vaccine on museum staff volunteers, 1908.
In white coats, Dr. John Neate (left) and Dr. F.F. Russell of the museum test their successfu typhoid vaccine on museum staff volunteers, 1908.
A World War I museum film educated doughboys about the dangers of VD. results have been so brilliant... that no excuse is needed for having temporarily ceased to develop” the museum’s collections and exhibitions. Nonetheless, he noted, many new specimens “have indeed been accumulated; the Museum has been added to in some new directions, and much obsolete material has been taken from exhibition to give place to more valuable and up-to-date specimens.” Even with only the ‘ ‘pick of the col- lections,” the remaining exhibit space nonetheless was “much overcrowded,”*! museum contributed to the timely diagnosis of diseases such as gas gangrene and trench foot, and to the publication of The Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War after the war ended.*? In the exhibit area, new dis- plays of wartime hazards such as shell shock were developed.
A World War I museum film educated doughboys about the dangers of VD. results have been so brilliant... that no excuse is needed for having temporarily ceased to develop” the museum’s collections and exhibitions. Nonetheless, he noted, many new specimens “have indeed been accumulated; the Museum has been added to in some new directions, and much obsolete material has been taken from exhibition to give place to more valuable and up-to-date specimens.” Even with only the ‘ ‘pick of the col- lections,” the remaining exhibit space nonetheless was “much overcrowded,”*! museum contributed to the timely diagnosis of diseases such as gas gangrene and trench foot, and to the publication of The Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War after the war ended.*? In the exhibit area, new dis- plays of wartime hazards such as shell shock were developed.

Related papers

An Ambulating Hospital: or, How the Hospital Train Transformed Army Medicine
Alan J Hawk

Civil War History, 2002

View PDFchevron_right
Exhibiting Medicine: Case Lessons from the Front Lines - Theory, Practice & Examples from the Otis Historical Archives
Michael Rhode
View PDFchevron_right
An Army Museum or a National Collection? Shifting Interests and Fortunes at the National Museum of Health & Medicine
Michael Rhode

Medical Museums: Past, Present, Future, 2013

Front cover A large cyst from the abdominal cavity of a patient, prepared in the 18th century by John Hunter, who cut openings for viewing the internal structure. Hunterian Museum at the royal college of surgeons. Back cover Top view of five fluid-preserved specimens in jars. Hunterian Museum at the royal college of surgeons. inside cover Prosthetic glass eyes, hand-made by glass blower Mollie Surman in the mid-20th century. Hunterian Museum at the royal college of surgeons. Medical Museums: Past, Present, Future

View PDFchevron_right
Civil War Sesquicentennial: Medicine and the Civil War
Alan J Hawk

2013

View PDFchevron_right
INSIGHT INTO THE HISTORY OF ANATOMOPATHOLOGICAL MUSEUMS - PART 1. FROM CASUAL AS SEMBLAGES TO S CIENTIFIC COLLECTIONS
Jacek Gulczyński, Ewa Iżycka-Świeszewska

Polish Journal of Pathology, 2016

We present a short history of anatomopathological museums in Europe. In the first part we provide an insight into the beginnings from the Renaissance until the middle of the 19 th century. We assess forms of acquisition and exhibition of the specimens concerning the steps of medicine and pathology development. The prototypes were "curiosities of nature" collections starting in the 15 th century. The next milestone collections focusing on the human body were those of Frederik Ruysch in the Netherlands (17 th century). In the 18 th century teachers in surgical and anatomical schools realized the educational power of such collections. Anatomopathology as a separate medical discipline was developing in parallel. At that time museums such as the one established by Honoré Fragonard in Paris, the Hunterian in Glasgow and Narrenturm in Vienna were created. At Polish universities in Cracow and Vilnius, such museums were beginning to emerge at the beginning of the 19 th century. Anatomopathological collections became more popular, gathering specimens: osteological, dry and mummified, as well as wet-embedded in alcohol, formalin, and mysterious mixtures. They provide a wealth of important data for scientific, medical, historical and even ethical areas, as well as methods and concepts of conservation and even recreation of human body parts.

View PDFchevron_right
Morbid Curiosities: Medical Museums in Nineteenth-Century Britain
Arthur MacGregor

Aestimatio: Critical Reviews in the History of Science

View PDFchevron_right
Hidden stories in the medical museum
Anna Harris

Chiron: Journal of the University of Melbourne Medical Society, 2010

View PDFchevron_right
An insight into the history of anatomopathological museums. part 2
Jacek Gulczyński

Pol J Pathol . 2018;69(2):118-127, 2018

The second part of the comprehensive work concerning pathology museums and collections presents their history since the 19 th century. The evolution and specialisation of museums, depending on the attitude of their creators and geographic localization, have been analysed. The changing aspects of obtaining the exhibits and how they were preserved, presented, and stored are also a part of this work. The methods of human organ fixation reached excellence in the 19 th century, but the rarity of some pathologies urged the scientists to recreate them artificially in models for didactic purposes. In the 19 th and 20 th centuries one could observe the flourishing development with a plateau and then decline from the second part of the 20 th century to the reorientation of the museums that took place in Europe and North America. The history of anatomopathological museums is connected with ethical problems related to acquisition of exhibits in previous centuries and especially during World War II. The changing purpose of the collections, as well as their unclear future and the impact on the visitors, are evident. For the last 50 years, many museums have been closing completely, but some collections have been digitalised and are still in permanent use. The uniqueness of old specimens with certain diseases, often long gone and not observed anymore, makes them important in many aspects nowadays. Pathology museums are themselves relics of the past, being at the same time tangible proof of ways of development in medicine, but also a way of preservation of human knowledge in a special type of relation with the human body.

View PDFchevron_right

References (39)

  1. See Robert Goler and M. Rhode, "from Indi- vidual Trauma to National Policy: Tracking the Uses of Civil Wa_r Veteran Medical Records," in David Gerber, ed., Disabled Veterans in History (Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press, 2000), 163-84.
  2. John Shaw Billings, "Who Founded the National Medical Library?1' Medical Record 17 (1880) 1 reprinted in Frank Bradway Rogers, Selected Papers of John Shaw Billings, Medical Library Association, 1965, 115.
  3. John Hill Brinton, "Address to Army Medical School, Mar. 13, 1896," Journal of the American Medical Association 26 (1896)1 599-605.
  4. See John I-lill Brinton, Personal Memoirs of John H. Brinton, Civil War Surgeon, 1861-1865 (Carbon- dale: Southern Illinois University Press), 1996, 180-81.
  5. Brinton, Memoirs, 181.
  6. Ibid, 190-91.
  7. Woodward to Tyson, Mar. 10, 1876, OHA 15, Curatorial Records: Letter Books of the Curators, 1863-1910, Otis l-listorical Archives, National Museu1n of l-lealth and Medicine, Armed Forces lnsti- tute of Pathology, Washington, DC. Hereafter cited as correspondents and "OHA. 11
  8. Otis to Cook, Mar. 24, 1866, OHA.
  9. Daniel S. Lamb 1 "A History of the United States Army Medical Museum 1862 to 1917, Compiled from the Official Records," unpub. typescript, 20. 14. Henry, Institute, 23-25.
  10. Wyndham Davis Miles, A History of the National Library of Medicine: The Nation's Tremury of Medical Knowledge (Bethesda: U.S. Department of Health and Hu1nan Services, 1982), 143.
  11. Otis to Dr. William Forwood, Jan. 4, 1867, OHA. 17. Louis Bagger, <(The Army lvledical Museum in
  12. Washington" Appleton's Journal JX, 206, (Mar. I, 1873)1 294-97.
  13. Mary Cletnmer Ames 1 Ten Years in Washington: Life and Scenes in the National Capital as a Woman Sees Them (Hartford, er, A.D. Worthington & Co, 1874), 477. 19. Lamb, "History," 43-44i Parker to Otis, Apr. 30, 1874, OHA.
  14. S. Weir Mitchell (as Anonymous) 1 ''The Case of George Dedlow," Atlantic Monthly 181105 (July 1866): 1-11. For a n1odern interpretation of Mitchell's work, see Robert Goler 1 "Loss and the Persistence of Memory: 'The Case of George Dedlow' and Disabled Civil War Veterans,u Literature and Medicine 23:1 (Spring 2004)1160-83.
  15. J.J. Woodward, "The Army Medical Museum at
  16. Washington," Lippincott's l\ifagazine, Mar. 1871, 233-42. 22. Miles, History, 32, 34.
  17. Henry, Institute, 75; Miles, History, 171.
  18. Henry, Institute, 73-79; Miles, History, 144-47. 25. Miles, History, 150. 26. Ibid., 165.
  19. Henry, Institute, 81-83.
  20. Lamb, "l--Iistory," 93-95.
  21. Miles, History, 16-167.
  22. Billings to E.C. Carter, Nov, 19, 1886, OHA.
  23. Lamb, "History," 96-101.
  24. Medical News, Sept. 18, 1886, quoted in Lan1b, "History," 88-89.
  25. Billings to Louis A. LaGarde, May 21, 1885, OHA. 34. Billings, Memoirs, 311. 35. Ibid., 314. 36. Ibid. 37. Ibid., 315.
  26. Billings to Surgeon General John Moore, Aug.JO, 1889, OHA.
  27. See Julie K. Brown, Making Culture Visible, Pho• tography and Its Display at Industrial Fairs, International Exhibitions and Institutional Exhibitions in the United States 1847-1900 (Harwood Academic Press, 2001).
  28. Louis A. LaGarde, Gunshot Injuries: How They are Infl.icted, Their Complications and Treatment (New York, William Wood, 1914).
  29. McCaw to Surgeon GeneraPs Office, Nov. 21, 1913, quoted in Henry, Institute, 150-51.
  30. Henry, Institute, 167-69.
  31. Surgeon General's Office of the U.S. Army, The Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War, 15 vols. (Washington' O.P.0., 1921-29).
  32. Henry, Institute, 241-43.
  33. Henry, Institute, 264.
  34. J.E. Ash, "The Army Medical Museum in This War," Southern Medical Journal 37,5 (May 1944), 261-66.
  35. 7. Armed Forces Institute of Pathology Annual Report 1947, 22
  36. Samuel Kime, "John Q Public, Glass, Plastic, and Our Specimens," AFIP Letter XII' 31 (July 31, 1956), Medical Museum News page.
  37. On visitors and attendance, see Randi Korn &
  38. Associates) National Museum of Health and Medicine Vis- itor Survey, April 2000. On exhibiting hu1nan remains, see Lenore Barbian and Lisa Berndt, "When Your Insides Are Out: Museum Visitor Perceptions of Dis- plays of Human Anatomy/' Human Remains: Conservation, Retrieval and Analysis: Proceedings of a Conference Held in Williamsburg, VA, Nov. 7-11, 1999, ed. Emily Williams (BAR International Series 934, 2001).
  39. Megan Edwards) uRoad Trip Washington, D.C.~On Beyond the Smithsonian: the National Museutn of Health and Medicine" Roadtrip Amer- ica.coll'. (Nov. 14)) http://www.roadtripamerica.com/ places/National-Museum-of-Healrh-and-Medicine.htm

FAQs

sparkles

AI

What key findings emerged about the Army Medical Museum's evolution?add

The museum transformed from a Civil War reference collection to a national pathology institute, reflecting changes in medical practices and societal interest over 140 years.

How did John Shaw Billings influence the Army Medical Museum's development?add

Billings expanded the museum's collections significantly, increasing holdings from 22,000 specimens in 1880 to 15,000 by 1888, emphasizing pathology and anthropology.

What does the collection of Civil War artifacts reveal about medical history?add

The museum's specimens illustrate medical practices before the introduction of aseptic techniques, showcasing the impact of antibiotics and germ theory in later medicine.

What methodological challenges did the museum face during its early years?add

Early context implementation relied on minimal specimen labeling and non-narrative exhibits, resulting in a challenge for comprehensive understanding of the medical artifacts.

How did public perception of the museum change over time?add

Visitor interest peaked post-Civil War with over 40,000 visitors in 1881, but shifted towards pathology post-World War I, diminishing public engagement as focus narrowed.

About the author
Michael Rhode

I was the chief archivist of the National Museum of Health and Medicine from 1989-2011. I currently work for the US Navy's Bureau of Medicine and Surgery's Office of the Medical Historian as the archivist. I'm coauthor of the Comics Research Bibliography, Editor of Exhibition and Media Reviews of the International Journal of Comic Art, and a contributing writer for Hogan's Alley and have written for the Comics Journal in the past. One of my first articles for IJOCA is reprinted here on ComicsDC - The Commercialization of Comics: A Broad Historical Overview (1999). The RFK Journalism Awards asked me to be a judge for the editorial cartoon division in 2009-2015. In 2015, I was a Herblock Award judge. I've edited Harvey Pekar: Conversations, a book of interviews for the University Press of Mississippi which is available now. In 2012, I edited and published Biographical Sketches of Cartoonists & Illustrators in the Swann Collection of the Library of Congress by LOC’s curator Sara Duke. In 2014, I co-edited The Art of Richard Thompson. In 2008 for my ComicsDC blog, I was chosen Best (Comics) Art Blogger by the Washington City Paper. As of January 2010, I've been writing on comics for the City Paper. You can see most of my writings at my Academia.edu page. The Library of Congress and Michigan State University's Library's Comic Art Collection both have "Michael Rhode collections" of cartooning items I've donated and I also send material to Ohio State University’s Billy Ireland Cartoon Library & Museum. As of 2015, I'm an associate member of the National Cartoonists Society.

Papers
525
Followers
791
View all papers from Michael Rhodearrow_forward

Related papers

The Army Medical Museum in World War I
Michael Rhode
View PDFchevron_right
Mobilizing the Museum: The Professional and Public Display of Military Medicine in America during World War I
Michael Rhode

The United States Army Medical Museum, founded in 1862, was recognized internationally as the premier medical museum. In 1914, the British Medical History Committee formed to preserve knowledge generated by World War I deemed this American institution a model to be emulated. Even so, when America entered World War I, a plan was implemented to reinvigorate the fifty-year-old Museum. It led to the Museum's concentration on pathology even as educational departments for motion pictures and photography were being created. The anti-venereal disease film 'Fit to Fight' was especially controversial particularly when shown to non-military audiences. The Museum's location near the Smithsonian Institution in downtown Washington, DC now seemed less desirable and there was a push for a new building on the suburban campus of Walter Reed General Hospital to consolidate medical resources. Thousands of new specimens arrived, a new numbering system for specimens was adopted and new exhibits of wartime concerns such as trench foot were developed. The Museum contributed to the diagnosis of diseases during the war, and publication of The Medical Department of the United States Army in the World War afterwards. World War I set the Museum firmly on the road to becoming a pathological institute. Meanwhile, as a 'modern' medical research institution, little value was seen in some of the earlier collections, and staff began discarding material -- especially from the Civil War. Changes in medicine made the Museum's traditional wide-ranging roles and relevancy including memorialisation diminish, as its importance in pathology grew stronger. Yet showing the value of traditional museum collections, lung specimens collected during the war recently were used for DNA typing of the 'Spanish' influenza. With unlimited access to Museum records and pertinent military documents, the authors analyze these developments, especially in light of the evolving intersection of medicine, museology and popular culture.

View PDFchevron_right
Photography and the Army Medical Museum, 1862-1945
Michael Rhode

Architext 4:2 , 1995

View PDFchevron_right
"An enduring monument": Philadelphia's contributions to The Medical & Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion (1870-1888)"
Michael Rhode
View PDFchevron_right
Administering a national historic landmark for medicine: A conversation with Dr. Adrianne Noe, Director of the National Museum of Health and Medicine, Washington, …
James L. Olds

The Anatomical Record, 1998

View PDFchevron_right

Related topics

  • History of Medicine
  • History of Medicine and the Body
  • History of Medical Museums
    • 580 California St., Suite 400
    San Francisco, CA, 94104
    © 2026 Academia. All rights reserved