Speculum

[M. Demetrius]

Actually, I was thinking of being the usER, not the usED. But...I can see why you thought I was volunteering.

The screw shaft, Martin, was that hand turned? Seems to be most excellent work.

[The_Mariner]

Actually, I was thinking of being the usER, not the usED. But...I can see why you thought I was volunteering.

The screw shaft, Martin, was that hand turned? Seems to be most excellent work.

either user or used, it matters not, it still makes me shiver.... :o

(just glad you took no offense as none was intended, after writing i thought that could be taken the wrong way.... glad it was not)


It really is nice work though, would be nice to see up close and personal (no not THAT close!)... :lol:

[Maximio]

Yes, i was feeling a bit queasy there!

Perhaps Maximio will know?

Arms on Roman speculae do appear quite frequently, and whilst on first consideration they seem to have no functional purpose - they wouldn't be needed to spread the two lower arms which open as the upper arm is drawn up with the screw - I have always regarded that when one considers that this is a gyneaological instrument then once inserted into the vagina the arms can then rest on the woman's thighs and so maintain the position whilst the surgeon is able to keep both hands free to conduct the procedure.

As you can see from the example in the science museum found originally in the Lebanon http://www.sciencemuseum.org.uk/images/ ... 84978.aspx the arms aren't present - just the mounting lugs. Whereas in this one though http://www.ssplprints.com/image.php?id=131975 described as being from Pompeii the arms are straighter and would easily balance across the top of the woman's thighs. Though there is a definite curve in Martin and Alex's excellent reconstuction seemingly in the opposite direction to rest over the thighs, it is likely that this would help when the woman is abducting her legs.

The quadrivalve speculum from the house of the surgeon at Pompeii does not have arms, though to be honest any woman dilated by such an instrument would be completely transfixed by it and surely incapable of movement anyway.

This instrument (Martin and Alex's), is very unlikely to have been used for anal dilation for which a bi valve spreader would be easier to use http://www.hsl.virginia.edu/historical/ ... culumB.jpg

Robert is quite right to say that wound retraction would be entirely different, tissue retractors and hooks would be used for this if absolutley necessarry. Don't forget that prolonged exploratory surgery would be very rare in the abdomen which would be the only other area that could take an instrument of the size of Martin's.

Byron, do something about your infernal rotas and come along to a show where I will demonstrate just what I mean. http://www.flickr.com/photos/16460709@N03/3604229501/

[D B Campbell]

Arms on Roman specula do appear quite frequently, and whilst on first consideration they seem to have no functional purpose - they wouldn't be needed to spread the two lower arms which open as the upper arm is drawn up with the screw - I have always regarded that when one considers that this is a gyneaological instrument then once inserted into the vagina the arms can then rest on the woman's thighs and so maintain the position whilst the surgeon is able to keep both hands free to conduct the procedure.

Wow -- too much information! hock: ( )

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Yes, i was feeling a bit queasy there!

Perhaps Maximio will know?

Byron, do something about your infernal rotas and come along to a show where I will demonstrate just what I mean. http://www.flickr.com/photos/16460709@N03/3604229501/

Duhhhhh, oh-kee-doh-kee! Who are we going to fill with lead shot though????? :? ?: :roll:

[Maximio]

Duhhhhh, oh-kee-doh-kee! Who are we going to fill with lead shot though????? :? ?: :roll:

Guess :twisted:

[Gaius Julius Caesar]

Hmmmm, I doubt Crispus would willing ly agree, but maybe.....unless you plan on doing surgery on yourself?

[Martin Moser]

Arms on Roman speculae do appear quite frequently, and whilst on first consideration they seem to have no functional purpose - they wouldn't be needed to spread the two lower arms which open as the upper arm is drawn up with the screw - I have always regarded that when one considers that this is a gyneaological instrument then once inserted into the vagina the arms can then rest on the woman's thighs and so maintain the position whilst the surgeon is able to keep both hands free to conduct the procedure.

Thanks for all the information, Maximio! As an addition I'd like to add that I find that the speculum when held by those two handles (with one hand) allows for more intricate adjustment of the angle of the priapiscus as compared to holding the thing by the screw only. Not being a professional doctor, this is just a personal impression, however.

Interesting specula you linked to there, Maximio. They have quite unusal features on them when compared to those normally mentioned in articles (which, I must admit, also makes me wonder if they are as old as they pretend to be).

[Robert]

Salve Martin,

Could you shed some light on the manufactoring proces? Were these pieces cast of were the cut from solid brass, annealed and shaped?

Man, the more I look at it, the more admiration I feel for the craftsman who made this .... I salute him!

[M. Demetrius]

...and just when I thought we'd seen all there is to see on this thread, here comes a new list of questions!

[Martin Moser]

Hi Robert,

Could you shed some light on the manufactoring proces? Were these pieces cast of were the cut from solid brass, annealed and shaped?

I can't tell you in detail really, since I wasn't present, but took over only to do the "fine-tuning". However, from what I could make out then, some of the bits were cut to form from thick sheet material, others (like the handle to turn the screw or the priapiscus) turned on a lathe, the 2 lateral handles annealed and roughly formed by hammer. The parts then were brazed or riveted together. The screw was made by brazing a longish rod with rectangular crosssection to a core. In so far the technique definitely differs from the original, where most parts probably were cast.
Actually, I am now planning to do the quadrivalve one from Pompeji next year (hopefully) and cast most of the parts of that one then ...

[Robert]

Save the molds! Save the molds!
I may well want one at some time in the future. Is there any good publication on the actual sizes? Only too often they show nice pictures of things, but forget to include a scalebare, eurocoin or whatever with a fixed measurements in the picture.
Thanks for the info! Most helpfull to understand the proces or making this, as I can make some things out from the way the final shape turned out and wanted to check if I had gotten it right. Far beyond my expertise as yet, I am still very much into getting the iron-bashing down to an art. Practice may not yet make perfect, but my skills are improving and I love the researching of original artifacts and trying to recreate them by similar means as pointed out by clues in the originals, like how to make the bards on plumbata and some types of arrowheads.

[Robert]

Maximio, sent you PM to your kind info offer.

[Martin Moser]

Hi Robert,

Save the molds! Save the molds!

I'll do the casting with sand, so there will only be positives of the parts to cast. I'll save those, though :-) )

Is there any good publication on the actual sizes?

You could start with:

Barbara Deppert, Astrid Schürmann, Barbara Theune-Großkopf (Eds.). Die Schraube zwischen Macht und Pracht. Das Gewinde in der Antike. Stuttgart 2000.

Bliquez, Lawrence J. Roman Surgical Instruments and Other Minor Objects in the National Archaeological Museum of Naples. With a Catalogue of the Surgical Instruments in the 'Antiquarium' at Pompei by Ralph Jackson. Mainz 1994.

[Robert]

Thanx, Martin! Will check those out.