The Hunterian and RCSE

The collections of various body parts in jars at the Hunterian Museum and the Royal College of Surgeons Edinburgh create an interesting comparison between the work of those working completely within the medical establishment and those without it. Our tour guide at the Hunterian described John Hunter as a man who did not have a formal education in medicine or science but who instead wanted to learn via experience and observation. He learned technique from his brother who had been a surgeon and teacher, eventually becoming good enough to open a school of his own. Hunter also collected a variety of body parts and pieces from animals and creatures of all sorts and in all forms. It was through studying what could go wrong with the body that he hoped to determine how to fix it; the theory of animal economy, demonstrating an analogous body plan across far reaching species, was the reason behind the extreme variance in creatures. John’s collection was certainly meant to be studied, both by himself and later by his students, but simultaneously it was meant to be seen. He displayed the pieces publicly, with days when people could come off the street to see the wonders that he had within his combined home-museum-school and whom he impressed with details of either the intellectual value or the actual price of most pieces. It was only after his death that the collection was sold to the Royal College of Surgeons London, where it was placed in display cases behind glass, arranged to emphasize the sheer volume of the collection.

While the collection at the Royal College of Surgeons Edinburgh at first may seem extremely similar, the differences quickly become apparent. This collection was never meant for public consumption but rather to teach exclusively. Even the physical placement of the collection within the building is telling—the upper level balcony which would physically give way were too many people to tread across it houses shelves of jars which can be seen by the public below but not touched. Importantly, the jars arranged on the shelves all contain diseased or abnormal human specimens and are all able to be held and examined closer by the medical student who might be researching. In general, one must pass inspection to be allowed up among the specimens. Further, while each jar in the Hunterian Collection is clearly labeled and explained, often with the names of those who were the prior owners, the jars among the teaching collection are anonymous. The prize piece in London was the Irish giant who was displayed in the center, well lit, and next to a small person wasting away of bone disease for comparison. Meanwhile, the centerpiece of the Edinburgh collection is less clear and certainly less prominent. It could be argued to be the case of Livingston’s broken arm, as this is the only piece with a name associated and certainly the only one with a 2 foot wide poster explaining its significance.

I am not sure what to make of this contrast in methodologies or reasons for presenting these valuable and informative collections in such differing manners. Yet, the difference between the newcomer and the professionalized, the public and the institutional, and the prized and the educational is marked in the comparison of the two collections.