The cautery was employed to an almost incredible extent in ancient times, and surgeons expended much ingenuity in devising different forms of this instrument. The cautery was employed for almost every possible purpose: as a ‘counter-irritant’, as a haemostatic, as a bloodless knife, as a means of destroying tumours, etc.
I was curious how it was identified as a cauterizing tool, which seemed like a niche tool to me. But it makes a lot of sense, actually, as any other tool that disrupts the integrity of the skin brings risk of infection, with nobody knowing germ theory and the importance of sterilized tools.
This one was always sterile, simply because you had to get it hot enough to do its job in the first place. On top of the whole sealing blood vessels with cauterization thing, this all made this tool the safest one to use for any task it could possibly perform.
Neat stuff.
But it makes a lot of sense, actually, as any other tool that disrupts the integrity of the skin brings risk of infection, with nobody knowing germ theory and the importance of sterilized tools.
Interestingly enough, while germ theory was not widespread (though some, like the writer Varro and the physician Galen, had an early conception of it), Graeco-Roman physicians of this time period knew that cleaning one’s tools was highly important, typically putting them through a quick boil in water before using them again.
Interesting, I didn’t know that. Still though, I wonder if the sterilization was maintained. Even something as simple as putting the tool down or touching it to another part of the body would contaminate it. The cauterizing tool, by virtue of maintaining its heat, does not risk this problem.
