The HHRF’s inaugural event took place on the 9th of May 2024 in the Barts Pathology Museum. The event brought together QMUL researchers from the School of the Arts, the School of History, the Dental Institute, the Blizard Institute and the Barts Health Archive.
Steven Moore, manager of the Pathology Museum spoke about the museum’s collections (4000 objects on display, and 1000 in storage). Although the museum’s collections are no longer used for teaching purposes, Moore noted, the collections can tell stories not just about health per se but also about the history of London’s East End, about the changing population of the area and its various ethnic groups, and their shifting work practices. Moore’s points were vividly illustrated by the Barts Health archivists Medha Chotai and Ginny Daw-Woodings, who showed attendees how individuals can be tracked from the post-mortem register to specimens in the Museum. As they observed, it is incredibly rare that archives can be brought together with wet specimen objects in this way. The discussion proved immensely useful, bringing out the existence of QMUL collaborations with the QM East London Research Network and Tower Hamlets Social Determinants of Health Research.
Dr David Mills, of the Dental Institute, spoke of his collaboration with the sculptor Jan Platun and described his Public Engagement work with the collections of the Pathology Museum, especially to highlight connections between Phossy Jaw – an occupational disease common to the East End populations who worked in the matchstick industries in the local area – and its connections to modern day osteoporosis. Dr Andrew Mendelsohn, of the School of History, noted the overlap between the museum’s collections and the curriculum of 1st year History students, who are taught about the history of the East End, labour history and the Match Girl Strike (1888).
Dr Mendelsohn spoke of the Pathology Museum as a space both of preservation and loss – in the move from wet collections to digital, for example – and asked us to consider what learning techniques are lost in such a move and what might be gained by reconnecting to physical media. Is it possible that the specimens in the Museum connect to us to the human in a countermove to 21st century medical imagery, which might remove us from the human? Though the specimens may have outlived their purpose as practical medical training objects, they still hold a great deal of power through being medical objects, relatable on a human level.
Dr Merilees Roberts, of the English Department, spoke about the problematic nature of the collections, particularly examples of bound feet and injuries caused – allegedly – by corset wearing. Dr Roberts discussed the possibility of using the collections to aid Public Engagement work that asks for viewers about their responses to the specimens, particularly from people with lived experience of certain health conditions. Can the objects be ‘listened to’ to (re)create their stories and help narrate those of today’s viewers?
In sum, the event successfully demonstrated to attendees that while the collections of the Pathology Museum are goldmines for historians of science and medicine, there is also enormous scope here for historians of art, of emotion, of architecture, and for anyone interested in the history of East London.