Summary This article explores the recently catalogued Manchester Medical Manuscripts Collection housed at the University of Manchester Library, its unique characteristics, and the varied research avenues opened up by this newly available collection. archives, midwifery, medical education The Manchester Medical Manuscripts Collection is a broad collection spanning approx. 1750–1930, and includes copies of lecture notes, case books and pharmacopoeia from centres of medical teaching such as Edinburgh, London, Manchester, Berlin and Leiden. The full range of subjects associated with medical education in this period are represented, comprising anatomy, surgery, practice of physic, physiology, materia medica, botany, midwifery and chemistry. The majority of the collection has its origins in the Manchester Medical Society which formed in 1834 and whose library came to the University of Manchester in the 1930 s with another significant portion of the collection originating from the Radford Library of St Mary’s Hospital, Manchester, which also came to the University at a similar time. There are 317 individual items which have been separated from the printed material found in these medical libraries and have been catalogued as a single archival collection. The majority of the collection consists of manuscript lecture notes, of which similar individual items can be found across the country, from the Highland Archives in the north to Somerset Archives and Local Studies in the south, and with large institutions such as the Wellcome Library and the various Royal Colleges holding a multitude of these manuscripts.1 However, they are generally housed and described in catalogues as individual discrete manuscripts or small collections. It is here where the Manchester Collection proves to be unique in that all the manuscripts formed part of a greater whole being created and collected by Manchester’s nineteenth-century medical elite. Founded in 1834 the Manchester Medical Society was a prominent professional association in the region, which had at its heart a large and ever-growing library serving as an invaluable resource for its members. The greater part of the manuscripts came to the Medical Society’s library as a result of donations from some of nineteenth-century Manchester’s most distinguished medical men, including John Hull (1761–1843) and Charles Clay (1801–1893), with those originating from the Radford Library reflecting the professional efforts of Thomas Radford (1793–1881). It is around these men that the collection has been arranged, with the manuscripts grouped into 22 series, each representing the individual who was either responsible for their creation or for their collection. Some of the manuscripts were created by these individuals as a result of their studies (e.g. lecture notes) or professional activities (e.g. case books) and others have been collected or purchased by them and stand as a reflection of their professional interests. A final series lists a number of individual manuscripts where the provenance is not entirely clear. Whilst it is known that they have their origins in the nineteenth-century medical libraries of Manchester, it is not clear who was responsible for donating them with the exception of one or two where it is evident that the Medical Society themselves purchased them for their collections. As a whole these manuscripts represent the work and interests of one region’s medical profession and demonstrate the influx of ideas from across the rest of the UK and Europe and their influence on Manchester’s medical elite alongside the development of medical education in the city. This can be further broken down to look at the role of particular individuals in Manchester. Looking outside of Manchester, comprehensive snapshots of education in other cities are also apparent as individuals donated collections of their student notes. For example, the collection contains 37 manuscripts all originating from one man’s time spent studying in Edinburgh c.1770 and a further 13 all from another’s time studying in Berlin c.1840. In turn this means the collection contains numerous volumes of notes representing the lectures of some of the foremost medical practitioners of the time, including William Hunter (1718–83), Sir Astley Cooper (1768–1841) and William Cullen (1710–90), which are of great interest in their own right. Such a broad collection opens up many potential avenues of research and points of interest. It is only possible here to touch upon a handful of them, and so I intend to first consider the surviving record of early provincial medical education in Manchester, the development of medical practice in the area, the preponderance of midwifery and obstetrical texts, and the presence of some more unique items not entirely in keeping with the rest of the collection. Manchester-based Education Now, as to practical anatomy, the means which we have in Manchester—(softly be it spoken!)—are equal, if not superior, to what they have in London; and are equal to those of any school in the United Kingdom. … It would seem almost as if the glory of London anatomy were travelling northward, and that we had arrested it in Manchester.2 Medical teaching had been taking place in some form from as early as 1783 when the likes of Charles White (1728–1813) offered public lectures through the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. This was followed by further series of public lectures provided by Peter Roget (1779–1869) and Benjamin Gibson (1774–1812) in 1805–07 and later by John Atkinson Ransome (1779–1837) and James Ainsworth (1783–1853) in 1811–16.3 The Medical Manuscripts Collection contains what is believed to be an outline of some of Ransome’s early public lectures in the rear of a manuscript of London obstetrician Thomas Pole’s lecture notes penned by Ransome himself; which would make them the earliest manuscript record of Manchester-based medical teaching.4 He introduces the lectures by stating that he will avoid technical terms and practical dissection along with his intention to respect ‘the female part of the audience’. The tone set from the very beginning clearly distinguishes these general public lectures from the more focused and professional lectures aimed solely at medical students offered by the later medical schools. The first established medical school which was eventually recognised by qualifying bodies did not come about until 1814, with Joseph Jordan’s Bridge Street School. In subsequent years, other competitors opened in the city and it was not long before Manchester became a flourishing centre for medical teaching. Jordan’s Bridge Street premises soon proved inadequate and he relocated his school to a new purpose-built building on Mount Street in 1826. Two years’ earlier, Thomas Turner (1793–1873) had established the Pine Street Medical School which proved to be Jordan’s greatest rival eventually forcing the closure of the Mount Street School in 1834 and seeing Jordan and some of his staff move to Turner’s school. This period also saw the relatively short-lived Marsden Street School (1829–39) and the Chatham Street School which was established in 1850 and amalgamated with the Pine Street School in 1856. Unlike the volumes of lecture notes originating in Edinburgh and London there are currently no known copies of lectures given in Manchester during this early period in existence other than those in this collection. Most of the extant Manchester lecture notes originate from the 1830 s and 1840 s at a time when the Pine Street Medical School (later the Manchester Royal School of Medicine) came to dominate being granted royal patronage in 1836 in consideration of its being the first complete school of medicine in the provinces. A number of these items are grouped by the students responsible for their creation, namely John Lomas and John Shepherd Fletcher (1822–82), but there are also a number of individual manuscripts that were collected by others or where the provenance is not clear. The individual teachers we see represented comprise the pioneers of medical education in Manchester Joseph Jordan (1787–1873) and Thomas Turner, such notable individuals as Samuel Bardsley (1764–1850) and Joseph Atkinson Ransome (1805–67), and the lesser known Richard Baron Howard (1807–48). Of particular note is a manuscript of rough notes of lectures on midwifery to be delivered by Thomas Radford, which unusually is written in his own hand. In this respect it stands apart from many surviving manuscript lecture notes of this period which were either created by students or by professional copyists which often led to the creation of very uniform texts. Instead, with Radford’s own notes we get an insight into the precise messages and information he wished to convey with more detailed information of the case studies he chose to illustrate his lectures with. These lecture notes are supported by a significant collection of artwork also collected and/or created by Radford at St Mary’s Hospital and used by him to augment his medical teaching. This collection of artwork too is housed at the University of Manchester Library, with cataloguing due to be completed in February 2018. An amalgamation of teaching interests into a single institution of higher education finally occurred in 1872 when the surviving medical school joined Owens College, which in turn gained University status in 1880 and the power to grant medical degrees in 1883.5 A record of the continuing medical education at Owens College is also apparent in the Manchester Medical Manuscripts collection in the form of physiology lectures given by Arthur Gamgee (1841–1909) and notes on pathology taken down by Frederick Craven Moore (1871–1943) during his time as a student there. It is important also to recognise the role of the various hospitals in Manchester in supporting the education for medical students provided by the numerous medical schools in the city over the years. The Manchester Infirmary was founded in 1752 and there is record of medical training taking place here many years prior to the establishment of Jordan’s school when apprentices served alongside the resident apothecaries, surgeons and physicians.6 For the students enrolled on courses at the different medical schools, the opportunity to receive practical instruction in anatomy and surgery on the wards of one of the city’s hospitals was essential to their training. This is evident in the collection through the student notes of John Shepherd Fletcher who attended the Pine Street School in the early 1840 s. Of the five surviving volumes of his notes one reads somewhat like a case book but is in fact a record of the clinical education he received on the wards of the Manchester Royal Infirmary.7 Being able to offer access to the wards of one of the major hospitals was a great boon to the private medical schools as witnessed in the high levels of competition by certain individuals to get elected to a position at such an institution. It was one such struggle that contributed to the closure of Jordan’s Mount Street School. For reasons that are not altogether clear, Jordan’s attempts to be elected to the role of house surgeon at the Manchester Royal Infirmary were repeatedly blocked. It was not until he agreed to close his school and join Thomas Turner’s establishment that he was able to successfully attain the position he had sought for so long. In an advert of 1827, some years prior to his election to the Infirmary, Jordan instead offered clinical teaching on the wards of the Eye Hospital and the Lock Hospital.8 The Infirmary was not the only institution to support Manchester’s flourishing medical schools with St Mary’s Hospital (est. 1790), the Royal Eye Hospital (est. 1815), and the Lock Hospital (est. 1818) all playing a prominent role. In a report of 1853 the executive of St Mary’s Hospital made note of their desire to see the Hospital play a central role in medical education and to become a centre for the teaching of obstetric medicine.9 The noted surgeon Charles Clay (1801–93) contributed to this effort, giving a course of lectures at St Mary’s in 1858 and a volume of testimonials in support of his lectures and recognitions from all the examining boards within the UK survives within the Medical Manuscripts Collection.10 This volume is not only evidence of the symbiotic relationship between the medical educators and the city’s medical institutions but the ongoing efforts by provincial teachers to have their courses recognised by the various examining boards. Medical Practice The rapid and extraordinary increase of trade and opulence, in this town and neighbourhood, it is well known, has produced a proportionate increase of population; of diseases; and of the extent and necessity of medical assistans.11 Moving away from medical education in Manchester a number of the other items in the collection speak more of the context in which this relatively young medical profession was evolving, the practical provision of health care, and some notable public health problems such as the 1832 cholera outbreak. A handful of case books survive, belonging to John Windsor (1787–1868) and John Hull, and incorporate midwifery cases, cholera cases, and general directories of patients. Whilst not always rich in medical detail for individual patients, the details offered in terms of the patient’s address, the medical institutions associated with their treatment, and the number of patients seen by an individual doctor hint at the nature of private medical practice. Although technically a record of clinical teaching, the aforementioned manuscript belonging to John Shepherd Fletcher is demonstrative of hospital care and contains a significant number of industrial accidents redolent of Manchester’s industrial past. They originate from 1843–45—at the height of the city’s industrial power and coinciding with Friedrich Engels’ visit to Manchester and his subsequent comments on the conditions of the working poor in The Condition of the Working Class in England. Manchester’s industrial character is something that cannot be readily ignored. It led to the creation of an environment in which disease flourished, accidents were rife, and levels of both poverty and prosperity swelled amongst different sections of the population all set against a much more complex background of political and class tensions.12 Amongst all this the scientific innovations of industrial production and commerce contributed significantly to important developments in health care. One such example of this can be found in the work of industrial chemist Frederick Crace-Calvert (1819–73) whose company was involved in calico-printing and the production of dyestuffs for the textile industry. Nevertheless Calvert had a strong history of cooperation with Manchester’s medical men and he was the first to successfully devise a method for producing the disinfecting agent carbolic acid on an industrial scale. A small collection of 13 letters belonging to Calvert survives and demonstrates his commitment to the wider adoption of antiseptic practices in correspondence with central government and the admiralty.13 Most notably there are three letters from Joseph Lister (1827–1912) in which he discusses his pioneering antiseptic work using supplies of carbolic acid provided by Calvert. A particular case book that stands out in the Medical Manuscripts Collection represents some of the pioneering medical work being undertaken at the time as opposed to general practice. This belonged to Manchester surgeon Charles Clay and describes in some detail a number of individual cases where he performed the ovariotomy, or oophorectomy.14 Clay performed the first successful ovariotomy operation in England on 13 September 1842 on 45-year-old Mrs Wheeler of Ancoats, earning himself the epithet the ‘father of ovariotomy’.15 He continued his investigations into the ovariotomy, and later the hysterectomy, for many years with the only surviving record of his work being this manuscript which covers the years 1855 to 1869. This work is potentially supported by a single manuscript of Clay’s correspondence held by the Wellcome Library.16 Items such as Samuel Bardsley’s commonplace book and James Bower Harrison’s (1814–90) autobiographical writings offer some insight into the broader context of nineteenth-century Manchester as a period of great reform and also their concerns and interests as individual professionals. Bardsley, for example, known during his life time as a Tory supporter, uses his commonplace book which spans just over 50 years up to 1848 to detail facts and opinions on parliamentary reform, the Corn Laws, and cotton factories in addition to medical subjects such as hydrophobia, cholera, contagion, and the Manchester Infirmary and Lunatic Asylum. Used in conjunction with other collections held at Manchester University, such as the archives of the Manchester Medical Society and the Manchester Medical Collection, which contains a remarkably broad range of documents relating to the history of medicine in the north west, it is possible to analyse this burgeoning medical profession.17 Equally, other medical collections in the city should not be neglected including those held at Manchester Central Library covering such collections as the Papers of Dr Edmund Lyon, accounts and diary of the surgeon Walter Barton Stott, diary of Richard Kay of Baldingstone, and the records of the Royal Manchester Institution, which include copies of early public medical and scientific lectures.18 Both Edward and William Brockbank, in their works of 1936 and 1952 respectively, make numerous references to the early minutes of the Manchester Royal Infirmary but the archives of the Infirmary are not currently readily accessible to researchers and remain in the custody of the local NHS Trust. Some items, including early annual reports, mid-nineteenth-century student registers, and extracts from the minutes made by Ernest Bosdin Leech, can however be found in the aforesaid Manchester Medical Collection. Midwifery and the Rise of the Man-midwife Midwifery, though formerly very much neglected, is certainly an art of the greatest importance toward the preservation of the human race, for by long and sad experience we find how absolutely it is necessary, from the number of lives lost, both of mothers and children, through the ignorance of those who practised it in the days when it was in the hands of the women; and it being confined to them alone was the only reason it was so neglected; they had no learning, knew nothing of the anatomy of the parts, and the greatest knowledge they could boast of was having born some children which some of them could not even boast of.19 A disproportionate number of the manuscripts focus on midwifery and obstetrics; a reflection of the popularity of the subject amongst Manchester’s medical men at this time. Charles White (1728–1813) had published his well-known work A Treatise on the Management of Pregnant and Lying-in Women in 1773 and efforts by some local practitioners saw the lying-in charity open in 1790. Approximately 25 per cent of the collection has direct relevance to the history of midwifery with references and connections to be found within other items as well. Again these items incorporate case books, essays and lecture notes which record the works of some of the UK’s most prominent men-midwives of the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century including William Hunter, Thomas Denman (1733–1815), Andrew Thynne (1749–1813), William Lowder, Colin Mackenzie (1697/8–1775), Thomas Pole (1753–1829), William Osborn (1736–1808), John Clarke (1758–1815), Thomas Young (1725/6–83) and James Hamilton (1767–1839). With the medicalisation of childbirth and the rise of the man-midwife, a relatively new phenomenon, these earlier manuscripts reflect the beginnings of a new specialty in the realm of medical teaching; one which was consistently popular with students despite its not counting towards qualification. The intrinsic value of midwifery skills could not be denied, along with the financial opportunities a successful midwifery practice could bring if a practitioner were able to secure the custom of well-off clients. Inevitably there were many disputes relating to some of the fundamental elements of practical midwifery, such as the use of instruments and the caesarean section, leading to varied opinions being offered by different teachers. The simple fact that such a range of these manuscript lecture notes are housed together facilitates the comparison between some of the prevalent theories and practices of the time. Likewise there are multiple copies of lectures given by the same individual but spread across their career allowing for an analysis of the development of individual ideas. The lectures of Edinburgh’s third professor of midwifery, Thomas Young, are by far the most prolific in the collection and evidence of his influence on a number of Manchester medical men is demonstrated by their diffusion throughout the collection. Young established the first lying-in ward in Scotland in 1755 based at the Edinburgh Royal Infirmary from where he was able to give some of the earliest clinical lectures in midwifery in the country thus signifying his teachings and practices to be some of the most significant in the history of midwifery education in the UK.20 Compared to some of the other midwifery lecturers represented in the collection, there is scant biographical detail available in relation to Young and he published relatively little during his lifetime. Records of his teachings, however, have survived from throughout his career with those from several different years found within the Manchester Collection and within a number of different archive repositories. Colin Mackenzie was another prominent teacher of midwifery lecturing at the same time as Young but in London, and for him also little biographical information survives. The three extant manuscripts in the collection that contain lectures given by Mackenzie are of particular importance owing to the simple fact that he did not publish during his lifetime and manuscript copies of his lectures remain the key source of his work.21 To complement the manuscripts that give insights into the pedagogical approach to midwifery in this period there is also evidence of its practical application extant within the collection. The most notable manuscript here being that created by Mr Richard Hardy, a surgeon from Whalley, Lancashire who practised midwifery in the local area.22 Covering the years 1794–1832 it sheds much more light on some of the social attitudes with its descriptions of single women, occasional background information about individual cases, and evidence of the assistance and training of apprentices. Used in conjunction with the lecture notes, it is possible to see the practical actions taken in response to challenging situations as opposed to those theories and ideas that dominated teaching. One case in particular that is described by Hardy sees him invite another local surgeon to assist on a particularly difficult case and a clear difference of opinion develop between the two men as to the appropriate time and situation to make use of the caesarean section. Rare and Distinctive Works Two of the most distinctive items in the collection stand apart from the rest owing not only to their age but their language, content and provenance. One in particular is known to have been purchased directly by the Manchester Medical Society under the influence of the society’s avid librarian Thomas Windsor (1831–1910), whose ‘immortal fame rests on his hobby of collecting old medical and scientific books’, and it is quite possible that the second came to the library in the same way.23 The first of the two is a Hebrew translation of Avicenna’s Canon of Medicine, thought possibly to date from the sixteenth century, which was purchased from a private German collection in 1877.24 The manuscript contains the first four of the five books of Avicenna’s work with the first page of each book intricately decorated with red ink. The second is a collection of medical writings in a mix of German and Latin by the esoteric author Johann Baptist Großschedel containing sections relating to the role of astrology in medicine and also extracts of a pharmacopoeia dating from the early seventeenth century.25 Windsor made clear his approach to collecting and the importance of such works when in 1857 he stated: I should wish to remark that, in my opinion, the greatest value of a public library being to present to private individuals works, or collections of works, which they could not otherwise obtain, the points in which such a library should be particularly rich would be:- 1. Books of plates etc. 2. Dictionaries, encyclopaedias etc. 3. Periodicals. 4. Old and scarce works. 5. Foreign works. To supply these deficiencies seems to me the point of greatest importance to the library.26 This stands in direct contrast to the original intentions of the Medical Society with regards to its library, which stated that the library should simply allow its members to ‘consult the works of the standard writers on medicine as well as the medical journals and periodicals’.27 The printed material acquired by the Medical Society, and still held by the University of Manchester, also includes valuable and rare works amongst which can be found a number of incunabula (books printed before 1501), works from Venice’s Aldine press, and items of particular interest to British medical history such as H. Chamberlen’s 1694 A Few Queries Relating to the Practice of Physick, a 1693 copy of N. Culpeper’s A Directory for Midwives, and J. Wolveridge’s 1671 Speculum Matricis or the Expert Midwives Handmaid.28 Despite arguably taking the most prominent role in the broadening of the Society’s library, Windsor was certainly not the only member to offer such rare items to its collections. Many of those who left manuscripts that now constitute the Manchester Medical Manuscripts Collection also donated rare printed works now in the University’s rare books collections, including such individuals as Charles Clay and Samuel Crompton.29 Unlike many of the other manuscripts in the collection, these two would have been of little practical use to the medical men of Manchester who collected them. Whereas the other texts contain lectures and essays whose messages were still relevant to practice at the time or were in fact created as a result of their own practice, it is doubtful whether the same individuals would have even been able to read the Hebrew manuscript. Instead, these two distinct items represent the book collecting practices of individuals associated with the Manchester Medical Society and the development of a prestigious library to accompany the now burgeoning medical profession in the north west. Echoing sentiments expressed earlier in the century by the pioneers of medical education in the city, the Medical Society’s officers clearly saw the provincial medical profession as one to rival the great establishments of London and Edinburgh. By the time the library was donated to the University of Manchester in 1930 it was described as being ‘the largest of its nature in England outside London’.30 This represents only the tip of the iceberg in terms of research potential associated with the collection with numerous other possible avenues emerging amongst the fields of medical humanities, creative writing and the history of medicine to name but a few. Up to now the collection has been very little used owing to a lack of a comprehensive and detailed catalogue; however, thanks to a very kind private donation to the University Library, the whole collection is now fully catalogued online and available for use. At the time of writing Karen Rushton was Medical Archivist at the University of Manchester and is now the Borough Archivist for the London Borough of Barking and Dagenham. Footnotes 1 For the Highland Archives, see D1179, Manual of Midwifery, 1760s, containing notes from lectures given in Edinburgh by Thomas Young, Highland Archives Inverness; for the somerset archives, see DD\PO/115, Various Matters (including MS volume entitled ‘Clinical Lectures by George Fordyce, senior physician to St. Thomas’s Hospital. Vol. 1 1st 1785’), Somerset Archives and Local Studies. 2 Thomas Turner, ‘Introductory Address: To the Students at the Royal School of Medicine and Surgery, Pine Street, Manchester, for the Winter Session of 1840–41’, Provincial Medical & Surgical Journal (1840–1842), 1840, 1, 33–8. 3 John V. Pickstone, Medicine and Industrial Society (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1985), 47. 4 MMM/16/2/2/2, ‘Pole obstetric lectures vol.2 & Ransome’s lectures’, University of Manchester Library. 5 Edward Mansfield Brockbank, The Foundation of Provincial Medical Education in England (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1936), 115. 6 William Brockbank, Portrait of a Hospital (London: William Heinemann, 1952), 16. 7 MMM/10/1, ‘Report of Cases seen at the Manchester Royal Infirmary’, 1843–5, University of Manchester Library. 8 Brockbank, Foundation of Provincial Medical Education, 68. 9 John Webster Bride, A Short History of the St Mary’s Hospitals Manchester and the Honorary Medical Staff (Manchester: Sherratt & Hughes, 1922), 28. 10 MMM/16/1/2, ‘Recognitions’, 1858, University of Manchester Library. 11 ‘Manchester Infirmary’, Manchester Mercury and Harrop’s General Advertiser, 10 December 1793. 12 See Pickstone, Medicine and Industrial Society for a more detailed overview of some of the economic, political and religious issues affecting the development of health care in Manchester. 13 FCC, ‘Frederick Crace-Calvert Correspondence’, 1867–76, University of Manchester Library. 14 MMM/16/1/1, ‘Ovariotomy Case Book’, 1855–69, University of Manchester Library. 15 William Fletcher Shaw, ‘Charles Clay: The Father of Ovariotomy in England’, BJOG: An International Journal of Obstetrics & Gynaecology, 1951, 58, 930–40. 16 MS.5747, ‘Letters to Clay from various correspondents’, 1842–90, Wellcome Library, London. 17 GB 133 MMS, Manchester Medical Society’, University of Manchester Library; GB 133 MMC, ‘Manchester Medical Collection’, University of Manchester Library. 18 GB 127.M134, ‘Papers of (and relating to) Dr Edmund Lyon’, Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives; GB 127.MS 926.1 S105 V1&2, ‘Diary and Accounts of Walter Barton Stott’, Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives; GB 127.MS f926.1 K7, ‘Diary of Richard Kay of Baldingstone, Bury, Surgeon, 1737–1750’, Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives; GB 127.M6, ‘Royal Manchester Institution’, Manchester Libraries, Information and Archives. 19 MMM/15/2/1/1, ‘Dr Young’s Midwifery Vol.1’, 1779, University of Manchester Library. 20 C. Hoolihan, ‘Thomas Young, M.D. (1726?–1783) and Obstetrical Education and Edinburgh’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 1985, 40, 327–45. 21 Josephine M. Lloyd, ‘Mackenzie, Colin (1697/8–1775)’, Oxford Dictionary of National Biography, Oxford University Press, 2006. 22 MMM/14/2/8, ‘A Memorandum of Midwifery Cases which I have Attended’, University of Manchester Library. 23 For the quote in this sentence, see Willis J. Elwood and A. Félicité Tuxford, Some Manchester Doctors: A Biographical Collection to Mark the 150th Anniversary of the Manchester Medical Society (Manchester: Manchester University Press, 1984), 6. 24 MMM/23/2/14, ‘Avicenna’s Canon of Medicine’, University of Manchester Library. 25 MMM/23/2/1, ‘Item ein sehr Nützliches und Köstliches Arzneibuch für Allerlei Krankheiten und Anlagen des Menschen’, University of Manchester Library. 26 Charles J. Cullingsworth, ‘Sketches of Medical Libraries. The Library of the Manchester Medical Society, Manchester, England’, Medical Libraries, 1900, 3, 4–6. 27 Ibid. 28 Edward M. Brockbank, ‘The Library of the Manchester Medical Society’, BMJ, 1930, 1, 1017–8. 29 Helen King, Midwifery, Obstetrics, and the Rise of Gynaecology: The Uses of a Sixteenth Century Compendium (Aldershot: Ashgate Publishing, 2007), 161–4. 30 Edward M. Brockbank, ‘The Library of the Manchester Medical Society’, 1930. © The Author(s) 2018. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the Society for the Social History of Medicine. This article is published and distributed under the terms of the Oxford University Press, Standard Journals Publication Model (https://academic.oup.com/journals/pages/about_us/legal/notices)
Social History of Medicine – Oxford University Press
Published: Apr 30, 2018
It’s your single place to instantly
discover and read the research
that matters to you.
Enjoy affordable access to
over 18 million articles from more than
15,000 peer-reviewed journals.
All for just $49/month
Query the DeepDyve database, plus search all of PubMed and Google Scholar seamlessly
Save any article or search result from DeepDyve, PubMed, and Google Scholar... all in one place.
Get unlimited, online access to over 18 million full-text articles from more than 15,000 scientific journals.
Read from thousands of the leading scholarly journals from SpringerNature, Elsevier, Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford University Press and more.
All the latest content is available, no embargo periods.
“Hi guys, I cannot tell you how much I love this resource. Incredible. I really believe you've hit the nail on the head with this site in regards to solving the research-purchase issue.”Daniel C.
“Whoa! It’s like Spotify but for academic articles.”@Phil_Robichaud
“I must say, @deepdyve is a fabulous solution to the independent researcher's problem of #access to #information.”@deepthiw
“My last article couldn't be possible without the platform @deepdyve that makes journal papers cheaper.”@JoseServera