Commentaries on the Surgery of the War in Portugal, Spain, France, and the Netherlands / from the battle of Roliça, in 1808, to that of Waterloo, in 1815; with additions relating to those in the Crimea in 1854-55, showing the improvements made during and since that period in the great art and science of surgery on all the subjects to which they relate.

IN PORTUGAL, SPAIN, FRANCE, AND THE NETHERLANDS, FROM THE BATTLE OF ROLIÇA, IN 1808, TO THAT OF WATERLOO, IN 1815; WITH ADDITIONS RELATING TO THOSE IN THE CRIMEA IN 1854-1855. SHOWING THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE DURING AND SINCE THAT PERIOD IN THE GREAT ART AND SCIENCE OF SURGERY ON ALL THE SUBJECTS TO WHICH THEY RELATE. REVISED TO OCTOBER, 1855. BY G. J. GUTHRIE, F.R.S.
SIXTH EDITION.
PHILADELPHIA: J. B. LIPPINCOTT & CO. 1862.

TO The Right Honorable The Lord Panmure, SECRETARY OF STATE FOR THE WAR DEPARTMENT, ETC. ETC. ETC.,
THESE COMMENTARIES ARE, BY PERMISSION, INSCRIBED, BY HIS LORDSHIP’S VERY OBEDIENT AND FAITHFUL SERVANT,
G. J. GUTHRIE.

Twenty months have elapsed since the Introductory Lecture was published in The Lancet; fifteen others succeeded at intervals, and fifteen have been printed separately to complete the number of which the present work is composed. Divested of the historical and argumentative, as well as of much of the illustrative part, contained in the records whence it is derived, it nevertheless occupies 585 pages—the essential points therein being numbered from 1 to 423.
Sir De Lacy Evans, in some observations lately made in the House of Commons on the subject of a Professorship of Military Surgery in London, alluded to these Lectures in the most gratifying manner; he could not, however, state their origin, scope, or object, being unacquainted with them.
On the termination of the war in 1814, I expressed in print my regret that we had not had another battle in the south of France, to enable me to decide two or three points in surgery which were doubtful. I was called an enthusiast, and laughed at accordingly. The battle of Waterloo afforded the desired opportunity. Sir James M’Grigor, then first appointed Director-General, offered to place me on full pay for six months. This would have been destructive to my prospects in London; I therefore offered to serve for three, which he was afraid would be called a job, although the difference between half-pay and full was under sixty pounds; and our amicable discussion ended by my going to Brussels and Antwerp for five weeks as an amateur. The officers in both places received me in a manner to which I cannot do justice. They placed themselves and their patients at my entire disposal, and carried into effect every suggestion. The doubts on the points alluded to were dissipated, and the principles wanting were established. Three of the most important cases, which had never before been seen in London nor in Paris, were sent to the York Military Hospital, then at Chelsea. The rank I held as a Deputy Inspector-General precluded my being employed. It was again a matter of money. I offered to do the duty of a staff-surgeon without pay, provided two wards were assigned to me in which the worst cases from Brussels and Antwerp might be collected. The offer was accepted; and for two years I did this duty, until the hospital was broken up, and the men transferred to Chatham. In the first year a Course of Lectures on Military Surgery was given. The inefficiency of such a Course alone was soon seen, for Surgery admits of no such distinctions. Injuries of the head, for instance, in warfare, usually take place on the sides and vertex; in civil life, more frequently at the base. They implicate each other so inseparably, although all the symptoms are not alike or always present, that they cannot be disconnected with propriety. This equally obtains in other parts; and my second and extended Course was recognized by the Council of the Royal College of Surgeons as one of General Surgery.