For some time I’ve been trying to gather data on the methodology and facts behind what passed for surgery and the healing of wounds in the Middle and Dark ages, and with both the internet and local library I’ve come up empty.
My next logical step would be to look up medical or historically-minded universities and professors who could be of assistance, but I hesitate to bother these busy folks before I have anything at all.
What suggestions do you, my fellow Dopers, have in this matter, before I continue?
One basic concept is that literally until the 20th century “surgery” meant one thing: amputation. And, again before the 20th century, practicing “medicine” meant listening to your rich patients and telling them what they wanted to hear.
So “Surgeons” and “Doctors” were two very different things. Doctors were basically upper class, university educated, aristocrats (and to a large extent, complete quacks). While surgeons were on the job trained, lower to middle class tradesman and generally knew what they were doing because if they didn’t they killed the patient immediately, not long term.
I have lots of books on the history of medicine and surgery, and the last time I went to the bookstore found another one. Check Amazon or your library.
Surgery certainly wasn’t limited to amputation until 1900. For example, the ancient Egyptians did cateract surgery.
You don’t make it clear how far your data gathering activities have progressed. My guess is that you are some way down the line, because if you google ‘surgery in the dark ages’ you will find several relevant hits, including what follows.
This site explores the involvement of barbers in surgery. The two occupations have been practised in tandem since at least the 11th century in France, and probably much earlier than that.
You may find other suitable sites using similar search terms.
Surgery was certainly unpleasent and performed as quickly as possible, but it wasn’t just amputation. There was, for instance, Cesearian sections. Of course, those were usually performed after the demise of the mother.
Moving right along, there is evidence of successful skull/brain surgery from ancient Eqypt, Rome, South and Central America. Surgeons in India pioneered a method of reconstructing lost noses back a thousand or so years ago. The Hippocratic Oath - again, a couple thousand years old - makes reference to the surgical removal of bladder stones (mainly to say “don’t do that”).
There’s a museum in Chicago displaying surgical instruments from around the world and through time. Most of them are pretty darn scary.
In addition to the procedures Broomstick has mentioned, there were several other surgical procedures performed before the 20th Century and which enjoyed relatively high rates of success. Two that come to mind are cutting for the stone (removal of kidney and bladder stones) and surgery to remove cataracts. Famous people who underwent these operations include diarist Samuel Pepys for the former and mathematician Leonhard Euler for the latter.
Just as a note for your research, historians don’t generally use the term “Dark Ages” anymore. The period between the fall of Rome and the Rennaisance is now generally divided into the “Early Middle Ages” (476-1000), the “High Middle Ages” (1000-1300), and the “Late Middle Ages” (1300-1500, sometimes later)
So, to summarize: surgery was more than just amputation. Firstly, there were various small (and profitable) dermatological procedures such as removal of boils, skin tumors, and similar small lesions. The surgeons at the biggest academic medical centers had some practice in more complex procedures, such as repair of fistulas. Setting of bones in case of compound fractures, traction systems, and casts were relatively well-developed.
Skull surgery was known, though trepannation was over-used. Bladder stones could be removed, though kidney stones were still beyond the surgeon’s skill. Anesthesia was touch-and-go, though alcohol, opium, and hemlock were all known and used to varying degrees. Rectal cancer could be diagnosed, but colon resection was beyond the surgeon’s skill. In general, the closer you got to the thorax and abdomen, the less the surgeon could do.
Keep in mind that knowledge of anatomy and physiology was very poor. Autopsy and dissection were illegal, so surgeons learned a number of fanciful theories about internal anatomy, all of which were wrong. Nonetheless, technique was slowly improving.
(My source is “The Illustrated History of Surgery”, by Knut Haeger, revised by Sir Roy Calne, FRS.)
However bad knowledge of male anatomy was knowledge of female anatomy was much worse. Since women’s bodies were considered inferior copies of men’s it was considered unnecsessary to study female anatomy in great detail.
Check out the works of James Burke. He covers lots of different things in his works, but he does talk about medicine in all of them, and he’s generally good about giving his sources. There’s also a fairly large book with “Ancients” in the title (can’t remember the rest of it at the moment) that has lots of information on medical practices from long ago,