Barbers -- England -- London -- History -- Sources; Barbers' Company (London, England) -- History; Surgery -- England -- London -- History -- Sources
1540. This year is one of the most memorable in the annals of the
Barber-Surgeons, as it witnessed the union of the unincorporated
Guild of Surgeons, with their more accredited fellow-craftsmen, the
incorporated Company of Barbers. It has been suggested by more than
one writer that such an union is shrouded in mystery, difficult of
explanation, and that in those days, with science advancing (slowly,
it is true), it might have been expected that we should read of a
divorcement, rather than a combination of two crafts, which then, as
now, were dissimilar both in their operations, and in the training and
intelligence necessary for their practice.
But it is essential to bear in mind that though the Charter of
Edward IV was ostensibly to the Barbers, it really was granted to a
fraternity, which to a great extent practised as Barber-Surgeons, some
of whom were Surgeons pure and simple, others combined both branches,
while others still carried on the more humble craft of Shavers and
Hair-Dressers; those of the Company who practised Surgery did no doubt
consider it a reproach to be dubbed “Barbers,” and for distinction sake
called themselves and were well known as “Barber-Surgeons,” indeed they
had so far established this title to themselves and to their Company,
as to get it recognised and so named in the Inspeximus Charter of Henry
VII (less than forty years after their original Charter as “Barbers”
had been granted to them). This is to a great extent confirmed by the
words of the Act now about to be referred to, which distinctly says
that there was then a Company of “Surgeons occupyinge and exercisynge
the sayde scyence and faculty of surgery . . . . . . commonly called
the Barbours of London.”
The Union therefore was not a joining of Barbers with Surgeons (THAT
had existed from the earliest times), but was the consolidation
of the “Guild of Surgeons” with another body of Surgeons who were
incorporated, and practised under the name of “Barbers” in conjunction
with actual working Barbers; and, as the Act provided what the Surgeons
should and should not do, and the like as to actual Barbers, limiting
their operations also, most if not all difficulty and apparent
incongruity in the union seems to vanish.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account