Bones of Contention: The Decision to Amputate in Early Modern Germany
The removal of a patient's limb was the most radical procedure performed by early modern surgeons. It occurred only when a part of the body was considered lost to the "cold fire" (der kalte Brand)—a final, irreversible putrefaction. The harrowing experience held life-altering conseque...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Interlibrary Loan: | Interlibrary Loan for the Fachinformationsdienste (Specialized Information Services in Germany) |
| Published: |
2016
|
| In: |
The sixteenth century journal
Year: 2016, Volume: 47, Issue: 2, Pages: 327-350 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Parallel Edition: | Non-electronic
|
| Summary: | The removal of a patient's limb was the most radical procedure performed by early modern surgeons. It occurred only when a part of the body was considered lost to the "cold fire" (der kalte Brand)—a final, irreversible putrefaction. The harrowing experience held life-altering consequences for patients and their families. By drawing on surgical treatises, correspondences, field manuals, and examination books, this article uncovers a process of negotiation that took place during diagnosis and prognosis in cases of the cold fire. Medical reasoning entered a volatile social space in order to determine the best course of action. The opinions of medical colleagues, patients, family members, friends, and even pastors were crucial to the formation of a shared consensus necessary to undertake a procedure. Amputation was a collective endeavor guided as much by communal concerns as by medical ones. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 2326-0726 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: The sixteenth century journal
|
