Artikel

Mary Seacole

Mary Seacole



We are searching data for your request:

Forums and discussions:
Manuals and reference books:
Data from registers:
Wait the end of the search in all databases.
Upon completion, a link will appear to access the found materials.

Mary Grant dilahirkan di Kingston, Jamaica pada tahun 1805. Ayahnya adalah seorang pegawai tentera Scotland dan ibunya seorang wanita kulit hitam bebas yang menguruskan sebuah asrama di Kingston. Ibu Mary juga merawat orang yang sakit. Dia sangat percaya dengan ubat-ubatan herba. Ubat ini berdasarkan pengetahuan budak yang dibawa dari Afrika. Pengetahuan ini disampaikan kepada Mary dan kemudian dia juga menjadi 'pendidik'.

Pada 10 November 1836 dia berkahwin, di Kingston, salah seorang tetamu ibunya, Edwin Horatio Seacole, tetapi dia segera menjadi janda. Menurut penulis biografinya, Alan Palmer: "Bersama kakaknya, Louisa, dia menguruskan asrama keluarga selama beberapa tahun, mengawasi pembangunan semula setelah kebakaran besar Kingston pada tahun 1843. Dia merawat kes-kes kolera dan demam kuning di Jamaica dan di Las Cruces di Panama di mana, selama lebih dari dua tahun, dia menolong kakaknya menguruskan sebuah hotel. Sekembalinya ke Jamaica, dia sebentar menjadi pengawas kejururawatan di kem tentera Up-Park. "

Pada tahun 1850 Kingston dilanda wabak kolera. Mary Seacole, ubat-ubatan herba terpakai dan ubat lain termasuk plumbum asetat dan merkuri klorida. Dia juga menghadapi wabak demam kuning di Jamaica. Ketenarannya sebagai pengamal perubatan bertambah dan dia segera menjalankan operasi ke atas orang yang menderita luka pisau dan tembakan.

Mary suka melancong dan ketika seorang wanita muda mengunjungi Bahama, Haiti dan Cuba. Dalam satu perjalanan ke Panama, dia membantu merawat orang semasa wabak kolera yang lain. Mary melakukan bedah siasat pada satu mangsa dan oleh itu dapat mengetahui lebih banyak lagi mengenai bagaimana penyakit itu menyerang tubuh.

Pada tahun 1853 Rusia menyerang Turki. Britain dan Perancis, yang prihatin dengan kekuatan Rusia yang semakin meningkat, meminta bantuan Turki. Konflik ini dikenali sebagai Perang Krimea. Tidak lama setelah tentera Inggeris tiba di Turki, mereka mula terserang kolera dan malaria. Dalam beberapa minggu, kira-kira 8.000 lelaki menderita dua penyakit ini. Pada masa itu, penyakit adalah ancaman yang jauh lebih besar bagi askar daripada musuh. Dalam Perang Krimea, dari 21,000 tentera yang terkorban, hanya 3,000 yang mati akibat cedera yang diterima dalam pertempuran.

Mary Seacole pergi ke London untuk menawarkan perkhidmatannya kepada Tentera Inggeris. Terdapat banyak prasangka terhadap penglibatan wanita dalam perubatan dan tawarannya ditolak. Bila The Times mempublikasikan fakta bahawa sebilangan besar askar Britain mati akibat kolera, terdapat kemarahan masyarakat, dan pemerintah terpaksa berubah pikiran. Florence Nightingale, yang mempunyai sedikit pengalaman praktik kolera, dipilih untuk mengambil pasukan tiga puluh sembilan jururawat untuk merawat tentera yang sakit.

Permohonan Mary Seacole untuk bergabung dengan pasukan Florence Nightingale ditolak. Mary, yang telah menjadi wanita perniagaan yang berjaya di Jamaica, memutuskan untuk pergi ke Crimea dengan perbelanjaannya sendiri. Dia mengunjungi Florence Nightingale di hospitalnya di Scutari. Tidak mahu menerima kekalahan, Mary memulakan perniagaan yang disebut British Hotel tetapi yang lain disebut sebagai "pondok Mrs Seacole" beberapa batu dari medan perang. Di sini dia menjual makanan dan minuman kepada pegawai Inggeris dan kantin untuk tentera.

Alan Palmer berpendapat: "Statusnya yang bebas memastikan kebebasan bergerak menolak perkhidmatan jururawat secara rasmi; menjelang bulan Jun, dia adalah tokoh yang tidak asing lagi di depan pertempuran, berjalan dengan dua keldai yang hadir, satu membawa ubat-ubatan dan yang lain makanan dan anggur Dia memberi keselesaan perubatan kepada orang cacat dan mati setelah serangan di Redan, di mana seperempat pasukan Inggeris terbunuh atau cedera, dan dia mengorbankan korban Itali, Perancis, dan Rusia di Chernaya dua bulan kemudian. "

Lady Alicia Blackwood menulis dalam Naratif Pengalaman dan Kesan Peribadi semasa Kediaman di Bosphorus sepanjang Perang Krimea (1881): "Dia (Mary Seacole) telah, selama masa pertempuran, dan pada waktu kesusahan yang menakutkan, secara pribadi tidak bersusah payah dan tidak berusaha untuk mengunjungi ladang celaka, dan melayani dengan tangannya sendiri hal-hal seperti dia dapat menenangkan, atau meringankan penderitaan orang-orang di sekitarnya; memberi dengan bebas kepada yang tidak dapat membayar, dan kepada banyak orang yang matanya tertutup mati, dari siapa pembayaran tidak pernah diharapkan. "

William H. Russell, menulis dalam The Times: "Pada waktu mereka sakit, lelaki-lelaki ini telah menemui doktor yang baik dan berjaya, Puan Seacole. Dia berasal dari Kingston (Jamaica) dan dia doktor dan menyembuhkan semua jenis lelaki dengan kejayaan yang luar biasa. Dia selalu hadir berhampiran medan perang untuk menolong orang yang cedera, dan telah mendapat banyak restu dari orang miskin. " Namun, Lynn MacDonald menunjukkan: "Rawatan perubatan yang diberikannya kepada askar mudah dibesar-besarkan - pesakitnya semuanya berjalan lancar. Kes yang paling serius berlaku di hospital umum, yang kurang serius ke hospital rejimen."

Sementara Florence Nightingale dan jururawatnya tinggal di sebuah hospital beberapa mil dari depan, Mary Seacole merawat pesakitnya di medan perang. Pada beberapa kesempatan dia didapati merawat tentera yang cedera dari kedua belah pihak ketika pertempuran masih berlangsung. Namun, sebahagian besar waktunya pada hari pertempuran menghabiskan untuk menjual makanan dan minuman kepada pegawai dan penonton.

Setelah perang berakhir pada tahun 1856 Mary Seacole kembali ke England di mana dia membuka kantin di Aldershot, usaha yang gagal kerana kekurangan dana. Menjelang November dia muflis. Dia didorong untuk menulis otobiografi, yang diterbitkan oleh Blackwood pada bulan Julai 1857 sebagai Pengembaraan Hebat Puan Seacole. Ia terjual dengan baik dan hidup dengan selesa selama tahun-tahun terakhirnya. Mary Seacole meninggal dunia kerana apoplexy di London pada 14 Mei 1881.

Pada 31 Disember 2012, Guy Walters melapor masuk Surat Harian: "Peringatan £ 500,000 - lebih besar daripada patung Florence Nightingale berhampiran Pall Mall - akan menunjukkan Seacole berjalan keluar ke medan perang, beg perubatan di atas bahunya, deretan pingat dengan bangga disemat di dadanya. Hanya ada satu masalah: sejarawan di seluruh dunia semakin tidak senang dengan patung itu, di tengah-tengah dakwaan bahawa pepatah Seacole telah terlalu jauh. Mereka mendakwa bahawa prestasinya telah terlalu banyak dijual kerana alasan politik, dan daripada terpuji - tetapi dalam kes ini tersesat - keinginan untuk mewujudkan positif model peranan hitam. Sekarang Seacole berada di tengah-tengah kontroversi baru dengan berita bahawa kisah hidupnya tidak akan lagi diajarkan kepada ribuan murid. Setiausaha Pendidikan Westminster Michael Gove telah memutuskan bahawa mereka akan belajar tentang tokoh-tokoh tradisional seperti Oliver Cromwell dan Winston Churchill. "

Walters memetik Lynn MacDonald, seorang profesor sejarah dan pakar dunia di Florence Nightingale, yang merasakan Seacole dipromosikan dengan mengorbankan Nightingale. "Nightingale adalah perawat perintis, bukan Mary Seacole. Tidak apa-apa memiliki patung untuk siapa pun yang anda mahukan, tetapi Seacole bukan perawat perintis, dia tidak menyebut dirinya perawat, dia tidak berlatih kejururawatan, dan dia tidak memiliki hubungan dengan St Thomas atau hospital lain. "

Imran Kahn, ahli eksekutif Forum Muslim Konservatif dan mantan ahli majlis Konservatif, berpendapat dalam Negarawan Baru pada 5 Januari 2013: "Menurut laporan akhbar, Mary Seacole akan digugurkan dari kurikulum kebangsaan sehingga guru sejarah dapat menumpukan perhatian pada Winston Churchill dan Oliver Cromwell. Katakan, para guru sendiri belum tampil untuk memberikan sokongan untuk langkah ini. Idea bahawa sekolah mesti membungkam suara hitam supaya guru dapat berbicara mengenai Churchill, Cromwell atau Nelson adalah idea yang hampir tidak berhujah. Tetapi perlu diingat bahawa penghapusan perbudakan berlaku semasa hidup Mary Seacole pada tahun 1840, dan kehadiran tentera raksasa di Hindia Barat Inggeris - 93 rejimen infanteri yang berkhidmat antara 1793 dan 1815 - apatah lagi peranannya yang sangat penting, Seacole berada di tempat yang ideal untuk menandakan peristiwa bersejarah yang sangat penting. Michael Gove mesti mempercayai guru untuk memutuskan apa yang demi kepentingan terbaik kanak-kanak , bukannya menyingkirkan orang kulit hitam dari sejarah. Tidak ada keraguan bahawa model peranan hitam sejarah seperti Seacole memberi anak-anak semua alat penting dalam mengatasi andaian perkauman mengenai sumbangan orang kulit hitam dan Asia kepada Britain. Mengetahui sejarah hitam mendidik kita semua, meningkatkan rasa hormat dan membantu menanamkan nilai-nilai pelbagai budaya bersama. "

Penentang idea untuk membuang Mary Seacole dari Kurikulum Nasional memulakan petisyen dalam talian: "Kerajaan mencadangkan untuk membuang Mary Seacole dari Kurikulum Nasional. Kami menentang ini dan ingin melihat Mary Seacole dikekalkan sehingga generasi sekarang dan akan datang hargai orang bersejarah yang penting ini. Peranannya dalam Perang Crimea sepenuhnya membenarkan status Mary Seacole sebagai tokoh Victoria yang diajar di sekolah-sekolah hari ini. Dia adalah pahlawan nasional ketika kembali ke Britain dan sejumlah 80,000 orang menghadiri faedah penggalangan dana selama empat hari untuk menghormatinya pada tahun 1857. Kemasukannya ke dalam Kurikulum Nasional adalah hasil dari kempen tanpa kenal lelah untuk mengenali seseorang yang telah menjadi tokoh yang dilupakan di zaman moden. Cadangan penghapusannya hanya dapat dikaitkan dengan reaksi balas terhadap Mary Seacole baru-baru ini sebagai simbol 'politik betul oleh media dan pengulas sayap kanan. Untuk membuang Mary Seacole dari Kurikulum Kebangsaan sama dengan menulis semula sejarah agar sesuai orldview memusuhi kepelbagaian sejarah Britain .... Mary Seacole satu-satunya tokoh Hitam yang terdapat dalam Kurikulum Nasional yang tidak berkaitan dengan hak sivil atau perbudakan dan menyingkirkan seseorang yang diundi oleh orang ramai, Orang Inggeris Hitam Terhebat mengirimkan isyarat yang salah. Kita harus diajar lebih banyak sejarah Hitam tidak kurang. "

Petisyen itu ditandatangani oleh 35,000 orang dan Yang Berdikari dilaporkan pada 7 Februari 2013: "Mary Seacole 'Britain hitam terhebat' adalah untuk terus mengikuti Kurikulum Nasional setelah pusingan bergilir oleh Setiausaha Pendidikan Michael Gove, Yang Berdikari telah belajar. Langkah itu merupakan kemenangan besar bagi para pejuang, yang menentang rancangannya untuk menjatuhkannya. Penangguhan itu diberikan di bawah tekanan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Nick Clegg, serta Operasi Black Vote yang membuat petisyen yang ditandatangani oleh lebih dari 35,000 orang. Mengenai Kurikulum lama, Mary Seacole - yang merawat tentera semasa Perang Crimean - muncul di lampiran seperti yang disarankan sebagai seseorang yang dapat digunakan oleh guru sekolah rendah di bilik darjah mereka untuk menggambarkan Britain Victoria. Dalam dokumen baru, kisahnya lebih penting lagi. Seacole, salah satu tokoh kulit hitam pertama dan paling terkenal dalam sejarah Inggeris, muncul bersama Florence Nightingale dan Annie Besant sebagai tokoh yang harus diliputi oleh murid sekolah menengah untuk mengetahui. "

Ubat mudah yang ada untuk penyakit mengerikan yang diserang oleh orang asing (boleh) tumbuh dalam keadaan yang sama yang menyebabkan penyakit yang mereka alami. Begitu benar, bahawa di samping jelatang selalu tumbuh penawar untuk sengatan.

Di negara saya, di mana orang tahu penggunaan kita, pasti berbeza; tetapi di sini (England) adalah wajar bahawa mereka harus ketawa, cukup baik, atas tawaran saya ... Sekali lagi saya mencuba, dan mengadakan temu ramah kali ini dengan salah seorang rakan Miss Nightingale. Dia memberi saya jawapan yang sama, dan saya membaca di wajahnya fakta, bahawa jika ada kekosongan, saya tidak seharusnya dipilih untuk mengisinya ... Mungkinkah prasangka Amerika terhadap warna berakar di sini? Adakah wanita-wanita ini enggan menerima pertolongan saya kerana darah saya mengalir di bawah kulit yang agak lebih suram daripada mereka?

Dia (Mary Seacole) sering terlihat berjalan ke depan dengan bakul ubat-ubatan persiapannya sendiri, dan ini terutama berlaku setelah pertunangan dengan musuh.

Saya biasanya bangun dan sibuk pada waktu pagi, kadang-kadang lebih awal, kerana pada musim panas tempat tidur saya tidak mempunyai tarikan yang cukup kuat untuk mengikat saya selepas empat. Ada banyak yang perlu dilakukan sebelum kerja hari itu bermula. Terdapat ayam untuk memetik dan menyiapkan memasak, yang telah dibunuh pada malam sebelumnya; sendi untuk dipotong dan bersiap untuk tujuan yang sama; ubat-ubatan yang akan dicampurkan; kedai untuk disapu dan dibersihkan.

Menjelang pukul 7 pagi kopi sudah siap. Dari waktu itu hingga pukul 9, pegawai yang bertugas di kawasan kejiranan atau lewat akan mencari sarapan. Kira-kira setengah jam sembilan pesakit saya yang sakit mula menunjukkan diri. Pada jam berikutnya mereka datang dengan lebat dan kadang-kadang sudah lewat dua belas sebelum saya menjalani tugas ini. Mereka datang dengan berbagai macam penderitaan dan penyakit; kes yang paling saya tidak gemari adalah jari dan kaki yang beku pada musim sejuk.

Dia (Mary Seacole) bukan hanya, dari pengetahuan yang dia perolehi di Hindia Barat, juga dapat mengatur pengobatan yang sesuai untuk penyakit mereka, tetapi, yang sangat penting, dia memberi mereka dengan khasiat yang baik, yang tidak mereka miliki cara mendapatkan kecuali di hospital, dan kebanyakan kelas tersebut keberatan untuk masuk ke hospital.

Pada waktu mereka sakit, lelaki-lelaki ini telah menemui doktor yang baik dan berjaya, Puan Seacole. Dia selalu hadir di dekat medan perang untuk menolong orang yang cedera, dan mendapat banyak restu dari orang miskin.

Di sini saya berjumpa dengan orang yang terkenal. Seorang wanita berwarna, Puan Seacole. Dari kebaikan hatinya dan dengan perbelanjaannya sendiri, dia membekalkan teh panas kepada penderita miskin sementara mereka menunggu untuk dibawa ke kapal (yang membawa mereka ke hospital).

Dia tidak membebaskan dirinya jika dia dapat berbuat baik kepada tentera yang menderita. Dalam hujan dan salji, hari demi hari, dia berada di posnya. Dengan kompor dan cerek, di tempat perlindungan yang dia dapat, dia menyeduh teh untuk semua yang menginginkannya - dan ada banyak.

Dia memberikan bantuannya kepada semua yang memerlukan

Untuk lapar, sakit dan selsema

Tangan dan hati terbuka, sedia memberi

Kata-kata baik, dan perbuatan, dan emas

Dan sekarang jiwa yang baik adalah "dalam lubang"

Apa askar di seluruh negeri

Untuk meletakkannya lagi di kakinya

Tidak akan menolong?

Pada bulan Mac 1856, perang berakhir dengan tiba-tiba. Puan Seacole kembali ke England tanpa wang. Dia berusaha menubuhkan perniagaannya lagi menjual barang-barangnya kepada tentera. Menjelang November perniagaannya telah gagal dan dia berada di Mahkamah Kebankrapan London. The Times surat khabar menerbitkan surat dari orang-orang yang ingin menubuhkan dana untuk membayar balik wang yang dia habiskan di Crimea.

Pada tahun 1867 sebuah jawatankuasa lain ditubuhkan untuk membantunya. Kali ini Ratu Victoria menyokongnya. Dia mengucapkan terima kasih kepada Mary Seacole untuk kerjanya di Crimea.

Seorang bayi yatim piatu yang miskin, berwajah coklat, berumur hampir satu tahun, mati (terkena kolera) di tangan saya, dan saya tidak berdaya untuk menyelamatkannya ... menjelang pagi roh wee meninggalkan dunia berdosa ini untuk rumah di atas. .. bagaimana idea itu mula-mula muncul dalam fikiran saya, saya hampir tidak dapat mengatakan - bahawa, jika mungkin untuk mengambil anak kecil ini dan memeriksanya, saya harus mengetahui lebih banyak mengenai penyakit mengerikan yang menyelamatkan orang tua dan muda, dan harus tahu lebih baik bagaimana untuk bertempur dengannya ... Saya mengikuti lelaki yang telah membawa anak yang mati itu untuk menguburkannya, dan menyuapnya untuk membawanya ke jalan yang tidak biasa ... Saya tidak perlu berlama-lama di tempat kejadian ini, atau memberi pembaca hasil operasi saya ... Tetapi pengetahuan yang saya perolehi secara aneh sangat berharga bagi saya, dan segera dipraktikkan.

Dia (Mary Seacole) telah, selama masa pertempuran, dan pada saat kesusahan yang sangat menakutkan, secara pribadi tidak lelah dan bersusah payah untuk mengunjungi ladang celaka, dan melayani dengan tangannya sendiri perkara-perkara yang dia dapat menghibur, atau meringankan penderitaan orang di sekelilingnya; memberi secara bebas kepada yang tidak dapat membayar, dan kepada banyak orang yang mata tertutup mati, dari siapa pembayaran tidak pernah diharapkan.

Di antara pengunjung adalah Puan Seacole, yang penampilannya membangkitkan semangat yang paling menggembirakan. Askar-askar itu tidak hanya memujinya, tetapi juga memeluknya di sekitar kebun, dan dia mungkin menderita dengan perhatian yang menindas dari para pengagumnya, bukankah dua sersan bertubuh luar biasa dengan berani bertindak untuk melindunginya dari tekanan orang banyak. Namun, wanita yang sangat baik itu tidak muncul dengan rasa cemas, tetapi, sebaliknya, tersenyum dengan ramah dan kelihatan sangat bersyukur.

Dia dianggap sebagai warga Britain kulit hitam terhebat kami, seorang wanita yang melakukan lebih banyak usaha untuk memajukan hubungan kejururawatan - dan perlumbaan - daripada hampir individu lain.

Di medan perang berdarah Crimea, dia dikatakan telah menyelamatkan nyawa askar-askar yang cedera dan merawat mereka di sebuah klinik di klinik yang dibayar dari sakunya sendiri.

Namanya Mary Seacole, dan hari ini dia hampir sama terkenal dengan heroin jururawat lain, Florence Nightingale.

Selama beberapa dekad setelah kematiannya pada tahun 1881, kisah Seacole banyak diabaikan, tetapi selama 15 tahun terakhir reputasinya dan eksploitasi telah mengalami pemulihan yang luar biasa.


Pelajar sekolah diajar tentang pencapaiannya dan bagi banyak orang, Seacole, yang dilahirkan di Jamaica pada tahun 1805 oleh seorang pegawai berkulit putih bernama Grant dan seorang wanita Creole dari mana Mary belajar "kemahiran menyusu", dilihat sebagai orang suci sekular.

Banyak sekolah, hospital dan universiti mempunyai bilik atau bangunan yang dinamai sempena, dan tidak lama lagi dia akan mendapat penghormatan terhebatnya: sebuah patung gangsa setinggi 8 kaki harus didirikan untuk ingatannya di perkarangan Rumah Sakit St Thomas, menghadap ke Rumah-rumah Parlimen .


Peringatan bernilai £ 500,000 - lebih besar daripada patung Florence Nightingale berhampiran Pall Mall - akan menunjukkan Seacole berjalan keluar ke medan perang, beg perubatan di atas bahunya, sebaris pingat dengan bangga disematkan ke dadanya.


Hanya ada satu masalah: sejarawan di seluruh dunia semakin tidak senang dengan patung itu, di tengah-tengah dakwaan bahawa pepatah Seacole sudah terlalu jauh.


Mereka mendakwa pencapaiannya telah terlalu banyak dijual kerana alasan politik, dan dari keinginan terpuji - tetapi dalam kes ini tersasar - keinginan untuk mencipta model peranan hitam positif.


Kini Seacole berada di tengah-tengah kontroversi baru dengan berita bahawa kisah hidupnya tidak akan lagi diajarkan kepada ribuan murid.

Setiausaha Pendidikan Westminster Michael Gove telah memutuskan bahawa mereka akan belajar mengenai tokoh-tokoh tradisional seperti Oliver Cromwell dan Winston Churchill.

Jadi adakah tidak adil untuk mengurangkan kedudukannya dengan cara ini? Tidak menurut beberapa ahli sejarah.


"Rasa gembur yang muncul di sekitar wanita yang layak ini adalah aib bagi kajian sejarah yang serius," kata William Curtis dari Crimean War Research Society.

Pandangannya dikongsi oleh Mejar Colin Robins, seorang Fellow Persatuan Sejarah yang baru-baru ini menulis makalah untuk jurnal akademik yang menyatakan bahawa Seacole adalah "subjek banyak mitos", dengan alasan bahawa banyak 'fakta' mengenai hidupnya tidak benar.

Memang, Major Robins menyebut pengajaran beberapa kisah mengenai Seacole sebagai "tidak bertanggungjawab" dan "pastinya bukan sejarah".

Sementara itu, yang memimpin tuduhan terhadap patung yang ditempatkan di St Thomas's adalah Lynn McDonald, seorang profesor sejarah dan pakar dunia di Florence Nightingale, yang merasa Seacole dipromosikan dengan mengorbankan Nightingale.

"Nightingale adalah perawat perintis, bukan Mary Seacole," kata McDonald. "Tidak apa-apa memiliki patung untuk siapa pun yang anda mahukan, tetapi Seacole bukan perawat perintis, dia tidak menyebut dirinya perawat, dia tidak berlatih kejururawatan, dan dia tidak mempunyai hubungan dengan St Thomas atau rumah sakit lain."

Kerajaan mencadangkan untuk membuang Mary Seacole dari Kurikulum Kebangsaan. Kami menentang perkara ini dan ingin melihat Mary Seacole dipertahankan agar generasi semasa dan masa depan dapat menghargai orang bersejarah yang penting ini.

Peranannya dalam Perang Crimea sepenuhnya membenarkan status Mary Seacole sebagai tokoh Victoria yang diajar di sekolah hari ini. Dia adalah pahlawan nasional ketika kembali ke Britain dan sejumlah 80,000 orang menghadiri faedah penggalangan dana selama empat hari untuk menghormatinya pada tahun 1857.

Kemasukannya dalam Kurikulum Nasional muncul sebagai hasil dari kampanye tanpa kenal lelah untuk mengenali seseorang yang telah menjadi tokoh yang dilupakan di zaman moden. Menghapus Mary Seacole dari Kurikulum Nasional sama dengan menulis semula sejarah agar sesuai dengan pandangan dunia yang memusuhi kepelbagaian sejarah Britain.

Lebih-lebih lagi, pengajaran tokoh sejarah Hitam diakui secara meluas untuk kejayaan murid-murid Hitam dan dalam menutup jurang pencapaian GCSE. Ini adalah untuk memanfaatkan murid dari semua latar belakang di sekolah dan masyarakat kita yang semakin pelbagai. Mary Seacole, sebagai tokoh Jamaica / Scotland, adalah panutan positif dan dihormati di kalangan NHS.

Sir W. H Russell, wartawan Perang Crimea untuk The Times, mengatakan tentang Seacole: "Janganlah Inggris melupakan orang yang merawatnya yang sakit, yang mencari yang terluka untuk membantu dan menolong mereka, dan yang melakukan tugas terakhir untuk beberapa orang yang terkenal mati. "

Mary Seacole satu-satunya tokoh Hitam yang terdapat dalam Kurikulum Nasional yang tidak berkaitan dengan hak sivil atau perbudakan dan menyingkirkan seseorang yang diundi oleh orang ramai Orang Inggeris Hitam Terhebat (100greatblackbritons.com) mengirimkan isyarat yang salah. Kita harus diajar lebih banyak sejarah Hitam tidak kurang.

Oleh itu, kami meminta pemerintah untuk mengekalkan penyertaan Mary Seacole dalam kurikulum kebangsaan.

Kehidupan mungkin berlangsung dengan cepat dan cepat, tetapi menyatukannya dan tidak lama lagi anda mempunyai naratif. Dan dengan cara yang hampir sama, seseorang dapat melihat kisah-kisah beberapa hari terakhir mengenai Mary Seacole, dan mengetahui coraknya. Masa untuk mengetuk ikon hitam dari tempatnya, nampaknya adalah falsafah, dan ia bermula dengan Michael Gove - siapa lagi? Dia ingin perawat dan eksploitinya dikeluarkan dari kurikulum kebangsaan kerana setelah dia pergi, akan ada lebih banyak masa untuk Churchill, dan untuk mempelajari nama-nama semua raja dan permaisuri England.

Masa juga mungkin untuk keperluan lain yang diperlukan dan moden, seperti fagging dan Latin. Tetapi dia mempunyai kepentingan sejarah, bukan? Tidak, tidak, katakan pelbagai sejarahwan, dan penjaga memori Florence Nightingale. Ke dalam pertengkaran menunggang Setiap hari Mail. "Florence Nightingale hitam dan pembuatan mitos PC," katanya. "Seorang sejarawan menjelaskan bagaimana kisah Mary Seacole tidak pernah berdiri." Dia tidak benar-benar hitam, katanya. Dia sebenarnya bukan jururawat. Dia hanyalah sejenis barmaid yang ceria memberikan bonhomie dan ubat. "Tidak diragukan lagi, dia pada suatu ketika pergi ke medan perang yang memberikan keselesaan seperti anggur dan melakukan yang terbaik untuk mengatasi kecederaan ganjil itu." Tapi, hei, dia bukan Florence Nightingale.

Berfikir untuk Lord Soley, kerana sebagai ketua rayuan peringatan Mary Seacole, dia harus berurusan dengan diplomatik yang dia dapat dengan mereka yang akan menukar ingatannya untuk tujuan mereka sendiri. Pada hari penerbitan, dia dengan sabar menulis surat kepada Surat Harian mencabar premis Seacole sebagai konstruk moden yang lahir dari kebenaran politik. Suratnya belum dapat melihat cahaya hari. Dia mendapat dukungan antara pihak dan dorongan tentera, tetapi dengan penolakan berterusan terhadap gagasan patung dan sekarang pemecatannya dari kurikulum, Soley menghadapi pertengkaran di dua bidang. Dan tidak perlu, dia memberitahu saya.

Adakah dia penting? Nah, tentera cepat menghormatinya. Adakah dia mengancam Nightingale? Tidak. Nightingale mengembangkan kejururawatan dan latihan moden. Seacole memerintah di medan perang. Ia bukan pertandingan. Dan, tebak, mungkin seseorang yang berwajah terkenal mendapat alasan selain daripada kebenaran politik. Gove and co, perhatikan.

Suara hitam jarang didengar dalam pelajaran sejarah kelas. Sekarang, Setiausaha Pendidikan, Michael Gove, ingin menghilangkan beberapa narasi terakhir orang kulit hitam dalam sejarah Inggeris yang diajar di sekolah.

Menurut laporan akhbar, Mary Seacole akan dikeluarkan dari kurikulum kebangsaan supaya guru sejarah dapat menumpukan perhatian pada Winston Churchill dan Oliver Cromwell. Tetapi dengan mengingat bahawa penghapusan perbudakan berlaku semasa hidup Mary Seacole pada tahun 1840, dan kehadiran ketenteraan raksasa di Hindia Barat Inggeris - 93 rejimen infanteri yang berkhidmat antara 1793 dan 1815 - belum lagi peranan pentingnya sendiri, Seacole sangat sesuai diletakkan untuk menandakan peristiwa bersejarah yang sangat penting.

Michael Gove mesti mempercayai guru untuk memutuskan apa yang paling sesuai dengan kepentingan kanak-kanak, dan bukannya membuang orang kulit hitam dari sejarah. Mengetahui sejarah hitam mendidik kita semua, meningkatkan rasa hormat dan membantu menanam nilai-nilai pelbagai budaya yang dikongsi.

Mary Seacole adalah seorang wanita yang terkenal terutamanya kerana jasanya semasa perang Krimea ketika dia merawat tentera Inggeris. Kisahnya luar biasa bukan kerana banyak nyawa yang dia selamatkan, atau, karena keberanian yang dengannya dia melayani bangsanya. Yang lebih penting adalah hak istimewa dan patriarki putih yang sangat besar yang dia perjuangkan untuk sampai ke barisan depan, berjuang menentang perlawanan dari negara. Ketika pejabat perang menolak rayuannya untuk menjadi pembantu tentera di Crimea, dia tetap memutuskan untuk datang ke London. Walaupun dia ditolak oleh Florence Nightingale, Seacole menghabiskan setiap sen untuk mempertaruhkan nyawa dan anggota badan sehingga dia dapat menyembuhkan tentera Inggeris dan sekutu yang cedera. Terpaksa mengambil pinjaman untuk melakukan perjalanan sejauh 4.000 batu itu, dia melakukan perjalanan sendiri, dalam masa-masa berbahaya.

Dikenali sebagai "Mother Seacole" oleh tentera Inggeris yang menyayanginya, 80,000 orang, termasuk Mejar Jeneral Lord Rokeby, yang memerintah Divisyen 1 di Crimea, menjadi acara penggalangan dana untuknya ketika mereka mendengar bahawa dia kekurangan dana. Jelas, Seacole memuja beberapa puluhan ribu orang sepanjang hayatnya, jika tidak lebih.

Bandingkan ini dengan keadaan semasa. Walaupun jabatan pendidikan ketika ini nampaknya sedang mengalami kejadian sakit di "Little Britain", baru tahun lalu ketika Seacole dipuji oleh Jabatan Kesihatan. Pada bulan Februari, jabatan tersebut mengundang permohonan dari jururawat, bidan dan pengunjung kesihatan di England untuk berpartisipasi dalam "program Anugerah Mary Seacole yang berprestij". Tujuannya, adalah untuk melaksanakan projek perawatan kesihatan dan pendidikan untuk meningkatkan hasil kesihatan orang dari etnik kulit hitam dan etnik minoriti.

Mungkin Michael Gove tidak mendapat memo itu, tetapi minggu lalu David Cameron meminta penghormatan yang lebih besar ditunjukkan kepada masyarakat etnik kulit hitam dan minoriti. Tentunya, ini bukan apa yang dimaksudkan oleh PM ketika dia mengatakan anggota parlimen harus "meningkatkan kehadiran mereka di pers etnik minoriti." Dalam membuat perubahan kurikulum ini, Gove tidak berhubungan dengan pemilih moden, memberikan PM tengah jari peribahasa, dan serius melakukan pekerjaan saat ini untuk mendorong kepelbagaian.

Sebagai seorang patriot, Micahel Gove harus menghormati ingatan pahlawan perang Britain. Pada tahun 1856 William Howard Russell, koresponden khas Times dan wartawan berpengaruh, menulis: "Saya telah menyaksikan pengabdiannya (Mary Seacole) dan keberaniannya ... dan saya percaya bahawa Inggeris tidak akan melupakan orang yang telah merawatnya yang sakit, yang mencari dia yang terluka untuk membantu dan menolong mereka dan yang melakukan tugas terakhir untuk beberapa orang yang terkenal mati ".

Bahagian kanan parti Tory mesti menyedari bahawa multikulturalisme telah memberi Britain kekayaan dan kepelbagaian yang mendorongnya ke tempatnya sekarang di antara negara-negara dunia yang kuat. Semakin cepat sejarah hitam dan Asia diceritakan dengan kuat dan jelas, semakin cepat kita semua dapat memperoleh keuntungan sebagai sebuah negara yang bersatu.

Mary Seacole "Britain hitam terhebat" adalah untuk terus mengikuti Kurikulum Nasional setelah pusingan U oleh Setiausaha Pendidikan Michael Gove, Yang Berdikari telah belajar. Langkah itu merupakan kemenangan besar bagi para pejuang, yang menentang rancangannya untuk menjatuhkannya.

Penangguhan itu diberikan di bawah tekanan Timbalan Perdana Menteri Nick Clegg, serta Operasi Black Vote yang membuat petisyen yang ditandatangani oleh lebih dari 35,000 orang.

Mengenai Kurikulum lama, Mary Seacole - yang merawat tentera semasa Perang Crimean - muncul di lampiran seperti yang disarankan sebagai seseorang yang dapat digunakan oleh guru sekolah rendah di bilik darjah mereka untuk menggambarkan Britain Victoria. Dalam dokumen baru, kisahnya lebih penting lagi.

Seacole, salah satu tokoh kulit hitam pertama dan paling terkenal dalam sejarah Inggeris, muncul bersama Florence Nightingale dan Annie Besant sebagai tokoh yang harus diliputi oleh murid-murid sekolah menengah untuk belajar tentang "perkembangan sosial dan budaya Britain semasa era Victoria".

Laporan menunjukkan bahawa Mr Gove merancang untuk menggantinya dengan tokoh yang lebih tradisional, seperti Winston Churchill. Tetapi bulan lalu, sumber-sumber yang dekat dengan Wakil Perdana Menteri memberitahukan bahawa Clegg akan berjuang untuk menghentikan penyingkirannya dari Kurikulum yang ditulis semula.

Perubahan hati yang jelas muncul ketika Mr Gove juga menolak rancangan kontroversialnya untuk membatalkan GCSE untuk memilih Baccalaureate Bahasa Inggeris yang baru.

Simon Woolley, Pengarah Operasi Black Vote - yang membuat petisyen di laman kampanye Change.org - mengatakan: "Ini adalah kemenangan besar untuk pendidikan. Anak-anak dan generasi anak-anak kita yang akan datang akan belajar mengenai eksploitasi hebat Mary Seacole dan Oladauh Equiano. Kepelbagaian sejarah kita yang kaya akan mendidik dan memberi inspirasi kepada pelajar muda hitam putih. "

John Coventry dari Change.org berkata: “Ini adalah contoh hebat dari kekuatan orang dalam beraksi. Kekuatan kisah Mary Seacole dan pentingnya kemasukannya dalam pendidikan anak-anak jelas bergema dengan orang di seluruh UK. Kami sangat gembira change.org dapat membantu memenangi kempen ini. "

Jurucakap Jabatan Pendidikan mengatakan: “Media sebelumnya melaporkan bahawa Mary Seacole tidak termasuk dalam Kurikulum Nasional yang baru adalah spekulasi. Kami tidak pernah mengatakan bahawa Mary Seacole tidak akan menjadi sebahagian daripada Kurikulum. "


14 fakta luar biasa mengenai Mary Seacole

Mary Seacole paling terkenal dengan kerjanya yang berani semasa Perang Crimean tetapi adakah anda tahu bahawa dia juga pengembara yang berani? Untuk meraikan Bulan Sejarah Hitam, berikut adalah beberapa fakta kegemaran kami mengenai jururawat dan ahli perniagaan perintis ini.

Pasukan Puffin

1. Mary Seacole dilahirkan Mary Jane Grant pada 23 November 1805 di Kingston, Jamaica. Ibunya adalah orang Jamaika dan seorang pendidik, dan ayahnya adalah orang Scotland dan seorang pegawai di Tentera Inggeris.

2. Jamaica telah dirampas oleh Inggeris pada tahun 1655, sehingga pada saat Mary dilahirkan, kebanyakan orang Jamaica bekerja sebagai hamba untuk tuan mereka di Britain. Namun, seperti ibunya, Mary dilahirkan bebas.

3. Selain menjadi doktor - doktor wanita yang dapat menyembuhkan penyakit dengan ramuan dan ubat-ubatan tempatan - Mary juga seorang ahli perniagaan dan mendirikan hotel dan kedai sepanjang hidupnya.

4. Mary pertama kali pergi ke England pada tahun 1821 ketika dia baru berusia 16 tahun! Dia kembali sebentar ke Jamaica untuk mengumpulkan sejumlah besar jem dan acar untuk dijual di England sehingga dia dapat bertahan selama beberapa tahun.

5. Pada tahun 1800-an, dianggap tidak biasa bagi seorang wanita untuk melakukan perjalanan sendirian. However, Mary was very independent and ended up writing a book about all her solo travels called Wonderful Adventures of Mrs Seacole in Many Lands. This became the first-ever autobiography published by a free black woman in the British empire.

6. In 1836, Mary married Edwin Horatio Hamilton Seacole, a white British merchant from Prittlewell, Essex. Edwin was the godson of Admiral Nelson! He sadly passed away in 1844 and despite proposals from other men, Mary never remarried.


Mary Seacole

Ziggi Alexander and Audrey Dewjee consider the life of a remarkable Victorian woman.

In 1854, 22 years after the emancipation of slaves in the British domains, a lone black woman was active on the battlefields of the Crimea tending the sick and the wounded. Mary Seacole successfully challenged Victorian prejudices against colour, class and gender. On her death in 1881, the obituary notices in The Times dan The Manchester Guardian paid tribute to a woman whose personal courage and contribution to the Crimean campaign had won her wide admiration.

With a distinguished medical career to her credit, Mrs Seacole ended her days far from her humble beginnings in Kingston, Jamaica. As a result of her work, she was able to count among her acquaintances some of the leading figures of the day. It is curious therefore, that while due respect is given to Florence Nightingale, 'Mother' Seacole has become a forgotten figure of that period.

Untuk terus membaca artikel ini, anda perlu membeli akses ke arkib dalam talian.

Sekiranya anda sudah membeli akses, atau merupakan pelanggan cetak & arkib, sila pastikan anda log masuk.


Was Mary Seacole racist? The Times and an idiotic attempt to erase history

I wrote a letter to the newspaper because I wondered if the plaque at 14 Soho Square, Soho, City of Westminster, will be vetted.* The plaque states:

The Kali, of course, was not under any obligation to publish my letter and declined to so do. It did, however, choose to enter into unsolicited correspondence with me in order to contest my opinion that Mary Seacole held racist views albeit that these views reflected the era in which she lived.

The judgment I have reached about Seacole is largely consequent on my having read her 1857 autobiography. The letter I wrote to the Kali quoted from it. At a time of worldwide public protest and disorder, the newspaper seemed unhappy with my audacity. I was, extraordinarily, asked to prove that the autobiography was not a fake.

Was it my reference to her deployment of the n-word that so upset the Kali? Was it her classification of the Turks as ‘degenerate Arabs’ or her opinion that, ‘the fleas are the only industrious creatures in all Turkey’? Or was it, rather, her racist dismissal of ‘the cunning-eyed Greeks’ and ‘the lazy Maltese’?

Could it, equally, have been her reference to ‘Jew Johnny’ and to the ‘dirty skin’ of foreigners that ‘spooked’ the newspaper? I doubt we shall ever know, but ‘spooked’ the newspaper certainly was. Has ‘Erase the Record’ become the Times’s new mission statement?

The fact that the preface to Seacole’s autobiography was written by William Howard Russell, the famous Crimean War correspondent of the Kali, made no difference. Nor did Seacole’s obituary, carried by the newspaper in 1881, even though it referenced her autobiography.

Both the Mary Seacole Trust and the Florence Nightingale Museum are reputable organisations that attest to the authenticity of the autobiography. The Observer newspaper printed extracts from the book as soon as it was published.

The Kali was especially taken aback by my assertion that Mary Seacole was a great admirer of Horatio Nelson. This well-attested opinion is unlikely be true, according to the Kali, since Seacole was born a year after the Battle of Trafalgar, in which Nelson died. Putting aside the fact that she was born in the same year, 1805, the absurdity of the suggestion being made by the newspaper is startling.

The movement towards decolonising the curriculum at school and university is gathering pace. Private schools such as Winchester, Fettes, Ampleforth and St Paul’s Girls’ School are now on the bandwagon.

Will the suppression of Mary Seacole’s autobiography be a part of the decolonising process? What else needs to be suppressed in order to decolonise?

How sad that a reputable newspaper such as the Kali should seek to contest a truth that might just help people get along with each other.

The McGovern-Kali correspondence, typos and all, is set out below. Judge for yourself …

June 15, 2020

08.23 Chris McGovern emailed letter to The Times.

I respect the right of the newspaper not to select my letter for publication and have, therefore, omitted it here. Parts have been quoted in the preamble above.

08:34 The Times Letters asked for contact details and posed this question:

Is your source for all these claims her autobiography?

09:21, Chris McGovern wrote:

Yes, they quotations are from Mary Seacole’s ‘Autobiography’ – Wonderful Adventures of Mary Seacole (1857). It can be downloaded on Kindle and the search facility used to pinpoint the quotations.

11:45 The Times Letters repeated its question:

Is there evidence that she definitely wrote this autobiography please? Its accuracy has been disputed in the past. Also, was she really a great admirer of Nelson? She was only born in 1805, the year of the Battle of Trafalgar.

12:14, Chris McGovern wrote:

Mary Seacole’s last will and testament appears to confirm her conviction that her husband (Edwin Horatio Hamilton Seacole) was a love child of Nelson and Emma Hamilton – as bizarre and extraordinary as that may seem. I reference this is in the blog below:

The authenticity of the autobiography is not questioned by the Mary Seacole Trust, which references it on its website:

Mary Seacole was, prepared to put her life on the line for the British Empire by working for it near the front line in the Crimean War.

The Nightingale Society references this book on Mary Seacole:

I think, on balance, that the Mary Seacole autobiography is as authentic as Churchill’s. Why would there be those who seek to deny its authenticity, I wonder? That could be worth exploring.

12:30, Chris McGovern wrote:

In her autobiography Mary specifically refers to her husband as being the ‘godson’ of Nelson. I think we might question whether the husband was love child but there seems to be clear evidence about her pride in the ‘godson’ connection.

This from Lynn McDonald’s book on Mary Seacole: “She married Edwin Horatio Hamilton Seacole, a merchant, in 1836. He was a sickly man, about whom virtually nothing is known. His family called him the natural child of Admiral Horatio Nelson and his mistress, Lady Hamilton, but there is no firm evidence for this speculation. Seacole called him Nelson’s godson in her will, where she left a ring Nelson was said to have given him to her benefactor, Count Gleichen. Seacole biographer Jane Robinson went to some trouble to try to track down the relationship, to no avail. 1 A similar first name may mean nothing, for people often named a child after a famous person, which the hero of the Battle of Trafalgar and conqueror of Napoleon most decidedly was.”

— Mary Seacole: The Making of the Myth by Lynn McDonald

12:35, Times Letters wrote:

Is there clear, irrefutable evidence of who wrote this book and when, and who published it? If so please provide it. It still seems odd that she should admire Nelson so much given that Trafalgar coincided with the year of her birth.

14:09 Chris McGovern wrote:

It is currently a Penguin publication. It was dedicated to, W. H. Russell, The famous Times correspondent in the Crimea during the War and he wrote the preface.

Mary Seacole dedicated it to:

DEDICATED, BY PERMISSION, TO MAJOR-GENERAL LORD ROKEBY, K.C.B.1 BY HIS LORDSHIP’S HUMBLE AND MOST GRATEFUL SERVANT, MARY SEACOLE”

Lord Rokeby wrote this preface (It should have said ‘Times reporter W.H. Russell this preface’, but his name does appear at the end along with a note)

“TO THE READER I should have thought that no preface would have been required to introduce Mrs Seacole to the British public, or to recommend a book which must, from the circumstances in which the subject of it was placed, be unique in literature. If singleness of heart, true charity, and Christian works if trials and sufferings, dangers and perils, encountered boldly by a helpless woman on her errand of mercy in the camp and in the battle-field, can excite sympathy or move curiosity, Mary Seacole will have many friends and many readers. She is no Anna Comnena,1 who presents us with a verbose history, but a plain truth-speaking woman, who has lived an adventurous life amid scenes which have never yet found a historian among the actors on the stage where they passed. I have witnessed her devotion and her courage I have already borne testimony to her services to all who needed them. She is the first who has redeemed the name of ‘sutler’2 from the suspicion of worthlesseness, mercenary baseness, and plunder and I trust that England will not forget one who nursed her sick, who sought out her wounded to aid and succour them, and who performed the last offices for some of her illustrious dead. W.H.RUSSELL3.”

“3. W. H. Russell: William Howard Russell (1821–1907), special correspondent for The Times, widely regarded as one of the first, most important war reporters. He accompanied the first troops to the Crimea, remaining for two years. His uncompromising dispatches from the battlefront opened the British public’s eyes to the sufferings of soldiers during the winter of 1854–5 while celebrating the heroism of the common soldier, and when Russell returned to England he was as well known as any of the war’s military commanders. He was critical of British military disorganization before Sevastopol, and his reports provoked a wave of national hysteria and recrimination (Winfried Baumgart, The Crimean War, 1853–1856 (London: Arnold, 1999), p. 141).”

14:16 Chris McGovern wrote:

Times obituary on Mary Seacole verifies the autobiography

Blue plaques are to be reviewed for their ‘problematic [racist]connotations’. Should such scrutiny also apply to the Jamaican ‘nurse’ of the Crimean War, Mary Seacole? Her Imperialistic views and her great admiration for Horatio Nelson, reflect her time and thereby coincide with those of Winston Churchill. In her autobiography she classified Turks as ‘degenerate Arabs’ and opined that, ‘the fleas are the only industrious creatures in all Turkey.’ She, also, dismissed ‘the cunning-eyed Greeks and ‘the lazy Maltese‘. Her guide in Constantinople she addressed as ‘Jew Johnny. Add to this, her occasional deployment of the n-word and her reference to the ‘dirty skin’ of foreigners and we can see that her views on race were not much different from Churchill’s and of most other people at that time. The man voted No 1 Brit and the woman voted No 1 Black Brit had much in common. How appropriate that they both have statues close to Parliament.

If you appreciated this article, perhaps you might consider making a donation to The Conservative Woman. Unlike most other websites, we receive no independent funding. Our editors are unpaid and work entirely voluntarily as do the majority of our contributors but there are inevitable costs associated with running a website. We depend on our readers to help us, either with regular or one-off payments. You can donate here. Terima kasih.


Mary Seacole

Mary Seacole was a businesswoman, world traveler, popular author, and heroine of the Crimean War. Why haven't you heard of her?

Geography, Human Geography, Social Studies, World History

By National Geographic Education Staff

Wednesday, November 27, 2013

Photograph © Mary Evans Picture Library 2008

Yellow Fever
Yellow fever (sometimes called yellow jack) is a virus that is transmitted by mosquitoes. The virus attacks the body's organs, particularly the liver. Pigments build up in the body, giving the skin and eyes a yellowish tinge called jaundice. People can develop yellow fever within 3-6 days after being bitten by a mosquito containing the virus. Symptoms include sudden fever, headache, back and muscle aches, nausea, and vomiting. Some yellow fever victims progress into a second phase of the disease, called the toxic phase. Symptoms include high fever, vomiting, bleeding, and coma. In the 19th century, up to 50 percent of yellow fever patients in the toxic phase would die. Yellow fever is not contagious. A vaccine was developed in 1937 by Max Theiler, a South African doctor and research scientist.

A Womans Help
"I am not ashamed to confess for the gratification is, after all, a selfish one that I love to be of service to those who need a woman's help. And wherever the need arises on whatever distant shore I ask no greater or higher privilege than to minister to it."
&mdashMary Seacole


What did Mary do after the war?

After the Crimean War ended in, Mary returned to London with very little money and in poor health. But her hard work didn’t go unrecognised – many of the soldiers wrote to the newspapers about all she had done for them, and 80,000 people attended a charity gala in 1857 to raise money for her.

She also received a number of medals for her bravery from governments in different countries.

In the last 20 years of her life, Mary led a quiet life, spending her time between London and Jamaica – where she went to escape cold winters. She died in 1881 in Kensal Green, London.


Mary Seacole Information

Jamaican-born Mary Seacole (1805-81), voted top of the list of the 2004 ‘100 Great Black Britons’ poll, is now slated to replace Florence Nightingale (1820-1910) as the true ‘heroine’ of the Crimean War. She is to be honoured as no less than the ‘Pioneer Nurse’ with a massive statue to be erected at St Thomas’ Hospital in London. This in spite of the strong links between Nightingale and the hospital, her base for over 40 years. It was there she established the first secular school for nurses in 1860 with funds in her honour for her work in the Crimean War of 1854-56. The Nightingale School operated for over a century from the hospital, whose redesign in the 1860s Nightingale also influenced.

At three metres high, as the Seacole campaign points out, the planned monument designed by Martin Jennings will be visible from the Houses of Parliament across the Thames and taller than the statue of Nightingale at Waterloo Place and that of Edith Cavell in St Martin’s Lane.

Fundraising for the Seacole statue is supported by an audacious campaign, employing the same Seacole myths used to persuade the Guy’s-St Thomas’ NHS Foundation Trust to give over the hospital site. This permission was granted by its board of directors at a closed-door meeting in 2007, with no consultation with experts, the hospital’s governors or staff. The Lambeth Planning Committee, which approved the site at a meeting in April 2012, had no mandate to consider the merits of the statue or its message but only the technicalities of site, about which there was no objection.

The ‘history’ issued by the Guy’s-St Thomas’ NHS Trust in support of its decision brings several, now standard, fictions together. It credits Seacole with providing ordinary soldiers in the Crimean War ‘with accommodation, food and nursing care’ and with winning four medals for her ‘courage and compassion during the war’. It fails to mention any hospital in which Seacole ever nursed, trained or sent nurses, but simply asserts that ‘Britain’s black heroine’ gave her ‘life’s work’ for the ‘early development’ of nursing (Karen Sorenson, ‘Mary Seacole Memorial Statue Update’, July 20th, 2011).

The statue is to show Seacole with medals won for bravery, resolutely walking to the battlefield to treat the wounded, all points that feature in the makeover myth but do not survive a reality check. Seacole won no medals, nor ever claimed to have done so. She evidently wore three or four medals when back in London, including the Légion d’honneur. It was not at the time a crime in the UK to wear military medals other than one’s own – it has been since 1955.

Pictures speak louder than words. Many images of Seacole now depict her as a hospital nurse in a blue-and-white uniform. Black nurses today could well identify with this current portrayal of Seacole – she looks like an early version of a Jamaican NHS nurse.

Yet she never wore any hospital uniform, for she never worked in a hospital. In the Crimea she dressed flamboyantly, as befitted the hostess of a restaurant.

White guilt is the likely explanation of this Seacole promotion and British whites have a lot to feel guilty about. Keenness for a heroic black role model is understandable, but why the denigration of another woman? Seacole herself had no grudge against Nightingale.

The vilification of Nightingale

The campaign promoting Seacole over Nightingale builds on 30 years of books, articles and films denigrating the latter. While she always had detractors, the serious assault on Nightingale’s reputation can be dated to 1982, with the publication of the Australian historian F.B. Smith’s Florence Nightingale: Reputation and Power (Croom Helm, 1982). The next major hit came in 1998 with Florence Nightingale: Avenging Angel (Constable, 1998) by a retired management consultant Hugh Small, which argues that Nightingale was actually responsible for the high death rates of the Crimean War and had a nervous breakdown as a result when she supposedly recognised this. Neither claim is supported by any serious documentation. Social media goes even further: see Facebook ‘Florence Nightingale was a Murdering Bitch’, later renamed ‘Florence Nightingale: The World’s Worst Nurse’, where she is described as a ‘deluded power hungry bitch’, who ‘looks like an uptight bitch’, so that ‘the day she died’ was ‘the best thing that ever happened to the field of nursing’.

The nursing profession was not responsible for either of the influential anti-Nightingale books, but neither did it defend her against them. It had been ignoring its founder for a long time we look to the future, not to the past, nursing leaders said. Some jumped onto the bandwagon.

The Nursing Standard , a magazine owned by the Royal College of Nursing, which supports the Seacole statue campaign, has published more than 70 items on Seacole in the last ten years, many containing exaggerated or false claims. To quote just three examples: ‘Against all odds, [Seacole] had an unshakeable belief in the power of nursing to make a difference,’ and ‘changed the face of modern nursing’ (April 21st, 2004) Seacole: the ‘late, great nurse,’ through her ‘amazing acts of bravery and courage,’ was ‘a precursor to modern nursing’, who ‘saw beyond hospital wards and into the environment in which people live, and made links between psychological and physical illnesses’, (May 14th, 2008) Seacole was ‘a great pioneer and made a significant contribution to nursing’ (May 30th, 2012). But it was Nightingale who had faith in the power of nursing and changed the face of modern nursing. The Nursing Standard gives not a single example of a serious contribution to the profession by Seacole, who never claimed to be a nurse.

‘Real angel’ of the Crimea

Bashing white Victorian heroines is fair game these days, it seems, especially those of privileged background and the higher the status the more delightful the fall. The latest example, ‘Bringing Nightingale Down to Size’, by a doctor regurgitating F.B. Smith’s imaginative accusations was published in the British Medical Journal of March 2012.

Two BBC films Florence Nightingale: Iron Maiden (2001) and Florence Nightingale (2008) have taken the down-with-Nightingale message to wider audiences.

‘Nightingale’s nursing “helped kill soldiers”,’ repeated The Sunday Times in a review of July 8th, 2001, while the 2008 film turned her into ‘The Liability with the Lamp’, ( The Sunday Times , June 1st, 2008). Other BBC broadcasts, Mary Seacole: The Real Angel of the Crimea (screened on BBC Knowledge in 2000 and Channel 4 in 2005) and Mary Seacole: a Hidden History (2008) uncritically sanctify Seacole. In the latter Seacole is called the ‘real angel’ of the Crimean War, who ‘saved thousands of lives’.

It is time to look at what these two women actually did and did not do in the Crimean War, against what is claimed for and against them. Since Seacole wrote a remarkable memoir, Wonderful Adventures of Mrs Seacole in Many Lands , first published in 1857, we can read what she did in her own words (page numbers below are from the 1988 Oxford edition, the same as in the original edition). Nightingale left copious material on the war, including numerous letters pointing out defects and recommending action. We also have the carefully researched analyses done on her return, notably her 853-page Notes on Matters Affecting the Health, Efficiency and Hospital Administration of the British Army (1858) and her ‘Answers to Written Questions’ the same year, which was her evidence to the royal commission appointed to inquire into what went wrong in that war. These are reported extensively in Florence Nightingale and the Crimean War , volume 14 in the Collected Works of Florence Nightingale.

Seacole’s Crimean War

In her memoir Seacole traces her interest in war to her Scottish soldier father, which gave her sympathy with the ‘pomp, pride and circumstance of glorious war’ (p.1). She next admitted to a longing to ‘witness’ war, especially since regiments she knew in Jamaica were leaving for the ‘scene of action’ (p.73). When the war actually began in late September 1854 Seacole was in London to look after her gold-mining stocks (p.74).

Newspaper advertisements invited applications for nursing posts, but Seacole never applied. Instead, after Nightingale and her 38 nurses had left, she set out to join a later contingent of nurses, one Nightingale knew nothing about. Seacole made the rounds of offices, beginning with that of the junior war minister, Sidney Herbert, but he neither interviewed nor hired nurses and declined to see her. She did not get an interview anywhere else she tried, but whether or not for reasons of race is not clear. She was old for hospital nursing, nearing 50, and had had no hospital experience, despite the frequent claim that she ran the nursing at an army hospital in Jamaica – not a claim she ever made herself.

Seacole then decided to go on her own. She would set up the ‘British Hotel’, which she advertised as a ‘mess table and comfortable quarters for sick and convalescent officers’ (p.81). She had used the name earlier at an establishment in Panama, but neither it nor the Crimean establishment took overnight guests – both were restaurants with stores. The Crimean venue also had a ‘canteen for the soldiery’ (p.114), no further details given. Seacole had a business partner in her Crimean enterprise, Thomas Day, a relative of her late husband.

Seacole devotes chapters of her memoir to the British Hotel in the Crimea, to its high-ranking visitors, including a French prince, a duke and a viscount and the meals she served them.

She also recounted the challenges of obtaining supplies, unreliable employees, rats and thieves. Clearly the British Hotel was her major occupation, but she also did voluntary work, such as taking tea and lemonade to soldiers waiting on the wharf for transport to the general hospitals in Turkey.

Officers could get a meal at Seacole’s, or send a servant to pick one up for them. Among the available items were tins of salmon, lobsters, oysters, game, wild fowl, vegetables, eggs, sardines, curry powder, coffee, currant jelly and non-food items such as saddles and boots:

I often used to roast a score or so of fowls daily, besides boiling hams and tongues. Either these or a slice from a joint of beef or mutton you would be pretty sure of finding at your service in the larder of the British Hotel. (p.138).

After the war was effectively over, but before the peace treaty was signed, she catered for excursions, cricket matches, picnics, theatricals, dinner parties and races, providing soup and fish, turkeys, saddle of mutton, fowls, ham, tongue, curry, pastry of many sorts, custards, jelly, blancmange and olives. For Christmas there were plum puddings (recipe provided) and mince pies. In hot weather she provided sangria, claret and cider cups. On the last excursion described in her memoir she brought a hamper of ‘a cold duck and other meats, a tart’ (p.190).

Seacole described ‘the officers, full of fun and high spirits,’ crowding into her kitchen and carrying off ‘the tarts hot from the oven, while the good-for-nothing black cooks … would stand by and laugh with all their teeth’ (p.141). Her customers were officers and others of that class and the food and drink provided far beyond the means of ordinary soldiers. There is nothing intrinsically wrong in this, but there is in the claim that her mission was to save the lives of ordinary soldiers, which was in fact Nightingale’s mission.

One children’s book gives such fake details as that Seacole ran a hospital alongside the shop and restaurant, where she ‘nursed the soldiers from 5am until midday’ and then to onto the battlefield (Emma Lynch, The Life of Mary Seacole , Heinemann, 2006). Another has her taking teams of nurses onto the battlefield with her, after she had been rejected from nursing ‘because of her race’ (Kay Barnham, Florence Nightingale: The Lady of the Lamp , White-Thomson 2002).

In fact Seacole was present at only three battles, the Redan assaults on June 18th and September 8th and Tchernaya on August 16th, 1855. The three major battles of the war took place the autumn before she had left London: the Alma on September 20th, Balaclava on October 25th and Inkerman on November 5th, 1854. Even those battles were only a day long the ones Seacole viewed were over in hours. Prior to Redan she had got a brief glimpse of action when, on horseback, she accompanied Omar Pasha and some Turks to a Russian outpost. She gave no further details as to what happened in the battle, but judged the experience ‘pleasant enough’ and even the source of ‘strange excitement’ (p.147).

Visitors and officers’ wives watched the (failed) assault on the Redan from nearby Cathcart’s Hill. Seacole described getting wind of the first assault the day before and preparing for it before daybreak: ‘We were all busily occupied in cutting bread and cheese and sandwiches, packing up fowls, tongues and ham, wine and spirits.’ These were loaded on two mules, ‘in charge of my steadiest lad’. She herself led the way on horseback, with a bag of lint, bandages, needles, thread and medicines. The British soon retreated, so that freed-up officers became customers for her refreshments. She then made her way to the temporary hospital (set up by the army), where she assisted with the wounded waiting for admission. There, her memoir states, she bound up wounds and gave cooling drinks. The mules and the steady lad, meanwhile, had moved off. After she found them and whipped the negligent boy she saw some more wounded, ‘with whom I left refreshments’ (p.158).

All this shows Seacole to have been spunky, generous and worthy of praise. But it does not demonstrate that she worked as a nurse or that her actions saved thousands of lives. Neither does it confirm her acceptance as a professional colleague by doctors, as some have claimed. Her earlier ‘tea and lemonade’ gifts, she herself noted, were ‘all the doctors would allow me to give to the wounded’ (p.101).

In the Crimea, Seacole ran a business, as she had throughout her life. Like her Jamaican mother, she owned and operated a boarding house in Kingston, mainly for army and navy officers and their wives.

Neither ran an invalid hospital nor nursing station, as is often stated. After she married Edwin Horatio Seacole in 1836 the two ran a store together. On an earlier visit to Britain she had earned her living by selling Jamaican preserves and pickles (p.3) while travelling in the Bahamas she acquired shells and shell work to sell back in Jamaica (p.5).

A doctress

In the Crimea, as in the Caribbean, she pursued her vocation as a ‘doctress’, or traditional Creole herbalist, alongside her business.

She charged for her remedies, but gave them free to those unable to pay. In Panama, where she lived for over two years, she first helped her brother run his hotel, then opened her own shop. She faced a cholera epidemic in a small outpost where there was no doctor. She claimed some cures for her treatments, but also ‘lamentable blunders’ and admitted that she shuddered when she thought of some of those cures she had tried for cholera (p.31).

She describes adding ‘sugar of lead,’ the toxic lead acetate, to a cholera remedy to make it work, a point that is not mentioned by her present-day supporters. In fact we know nothing of the precise ingredients of her cures, for she left no details. Claims such as those made in the film, Mary Seacole: A Hidden History, that Seacole functioned not only as a nurse, but as a ‘very good doctor’ and a ‘very intelligent pharmacist far in advance of British medicine’ are sheer speculation.

In the Crimean War Seacole’s ‘patients’ were all walk-ins. The army sent its most serious cases to the general hospitals, mostly under Nightingale, the less serious to regimental hospitals. Men with lesser ailments such as headaches and stomach complaints took themselves to the British Hotel. Seacole describes leaving her food preparations in the kitchen to serve ‘patients’ in the store (p.125). Unlike any hospital, the British Hotel closed nightly at 8pm and all day on Sunday (p.145).

Seacole’s business did well for a year but went bankrupt when a peace treaty was signed on March 30th, 1856 and the British Army began to depart. Seacole had laid in expensive provisions which could be sold for only a fraction of their outlay. She described taking a hammer to cases of red wine, rather than let them be taken by the Russians (p.196). After the war friends raised funds to enable her to start another business and she briefly opened a store in Aldershot. However it, too, failed. Later a trust fund was raised for her so that she could live at ease – she returned to Jamaica, before finally settling in England in 1865. Consistent with her census entry shortly before her death, showing that she lived on independent means, her will shows her to have died prosperous.

The Seacole campaign has not only changed her occupation, but her race. She was three-quarters white and proud of her ‘Scotch blood’ (p.1). She had nothing good to say about her African/Creole heritage, but made a point of distancing herself from the ‘lazy Creole’ image (p.2). Seacole refers to ‘Blacks’, ‘negroes’ and ‘niggers’, throughout her memoir, but she never uses any such word for herself. She employed a black maid and the above-mentioned ‘good for nothing black cooks’. In her own words: ‘I am only a little brown – a few shades duskier than the brunettes whom you all admire so much.’ (p.4) Seacole supporters have Nightingale living a life of safety at her hospital in Turkey, far from the battlefield.

True, she and her nurses were 300 miles away, across the Bosphorus from Istanbul (then Constantinople), at the hospitals to which the British Army sent them. But these were dangerous places and many doctors and nurses died of disease. Nightingale herself nearly succumbed to ‘Crimean fever’, probably brucellosis, a disease not identified until the 1880s.

Her barrack hospital at Scutari was then the largest in the world, but it was never intended to be a hospital and lacked such basic necessities as running water, functioning toilets, laundry and operating theatres. Its sewers and drains were grossly defective, faults reported by doctors months before Nightingale arrived. But renovations were not started until March 1855, with the arrival of a sanitary commission headed by Dr John Sutherland (1808-91) with Robert Rawlinson (1810-98), a leading civil engineer and water expert, and James Newlands (1813-71), the pioneering borough engineer of Liverpool, who supervised the clean up.

Both Sutherland and Rawlinson subsequently became Nightingale’s close collaborators.

Nightingale’s hospital had a high death rate, but so did all the army general hospitals. Contrary to statements by Hugh Small, who did not use the full mortality statistics available in Avenging Angel, the highest death rate was at Kulali and reported as such by Dr Sutherland – a hospital not under Nightingale’s supervision but nursed by the Irish Sisters of Mercy. They, no more than Nightingale, should be held responsible for its death rates, for they, too, were working where they were sent and should hardly be blamed for the state of the sewers and drains. Nearly half the deaths from disease in those hospitals were due to bowel diseases.

Frequently unrecognised is the dirty work Nightingale took on as a result of those defective sanitary arrangements. Her own report notes the flowing faeces on the floor and the pertinent fact that the men generally had no shoes or slippers.

Tubs were provided in the wards for those who could not walk to the toilet areas. Nightingale herself organised the orderlies in the morning to remove the excreta. But this ‘underside of history’ is simply ignored in both the book and film coverage of the war.

Nightingale’s work during the war included hands-on nursing, the management of nursing at several hospitals and writing to remonstrate with officials back in England on the desperate conditions.

She set up new systems, established laundries and kitchens, reducing cross-infection and improving nutrition. She did much to make the life of the ordinary soldier better, including establishing coffee and reading rooms for those convalescing after treatment. She also wrote to families informing them of the deaths of loved ones.

She did not save thousands of lives during the war but her research and recommendations after it saved many more. The honour of actually reducing death rates at the war hospitals must go primarily to the sanitary commission and also to the supply commission, headed by Sir John McNeill, another Nightingale ally, which made the crucial improvements in nutrition, clothing and shelter.

Making a difference

The sheer scale of the death rates of the Crimean War seems to have escaped the notice of many commentators: 22.7 per cent of the troops sent by the British Army died, 30.7 per cent of the French army. Firm data is lacking for the Russians (and the Turks) but the figure is probably higher. By comparison, the death rate in the US army during the Vietnam War was 2.3 per cent.

The French were the instigators of the Crimean War, sent more troops and were better prepared than the British. Their death rates were lower in the first year. But the British government learned from the commissions it sent out and made enormous changes. British death rates fell dramatically, from 23 per cent in the first winter to 2.5 per cent in the second – no greater than deaths among soldiers in peacetime barracks in London, as Nightingale proudly showed in a chart. In contrast, the French (lower) 11 per cent death rate in the first winter, rose to 20 per cent in the second winter.

Since the French were late in publishing their statistics, neither Nightingale nor the royal commission could use them for comparison. However French doctors themselves credited the British reforms for their superior performance. Once they were properly cleansed and functioning Nightingale was proud of the Crimean hospitals. In her own charts she separated the two periods, before and after the sanitary and supply commissions, to emphasise the crucial role they played in reducing mortality.

Her analysis of what went wrong was widely accepted and led to major changes to health care in the British Army. The ‘Nightingale Fund’ raised in her honour for that work paid for the training school at St Thomas’, which led to raising nursing to the level of a profession throughout much of the world. Her experience of the war, and her reputation and research as a result of it, grounded all the social and public health work she did for the rest of her life. Her vision for health reform included bold statements, such as the belief that the poor should receive as good quality hospital care as private patients and warnings as to the dangers of hospital acquired infections. Nightingale, in short, is no mere historical figure. Her lamp should not be retired but shone brightly onto the hospital and health care problems of today.

Lynn McDonald is Emerita Professor of Sociology at the University of Guelph, Canada


Mary Jane Seacole (1805-1881)

Mary Jane Grant Seacole was an early nurse in the British Empire during the 19th Century. Born in Kingston, Jamaica as Mary Grant, she was the daughter of a Scottish officer and a black mother. Mary’s mother ran a hospital/boarding house in Kingston and she, after a brief period as a servant, returned to her family home and worked alongside her mother. It was during this period that Mary’s skills as a nurse were first recognised and she spent a good deal of time travelling throughout the Caribbean providing care. Mary Jane Grant married Edwin Seacole in 1836 but he died eight years later.

In 1850, Mary Seacole resided briefly in Panama with her half brother, Edward, where they ran a hotel for travelers bound for Gold Rush California. Seacole’s reputation as a nurse grew as she provided care for these mostly American travelers during several outbreaks of cholera.

In 1853, when Great Britain declared war on Russia, initiating the Crimean War, Seacole traveled to England to offer her services. The British government and the Crimean Fund initially rejected her offer of assistance. An old friend and distant relative, Thomas Day, however, provided Seacole with the necessary funds to travel to the Crimea and set up a hospital and boarding house for convalescing officers. In the 1850s Crimea was part of the Russian Empire. After the break up of the Soviet Union, it became part of Ukraine and only in 2014 was it annexed to Russia again.

On arrival in Turkey, Seacole sought out Florence Nightingale and offered her services. Nightingale refused but Seacole continued on to the Crimea despite having no official support. When she arrived in the Crimea she constructed her hotel near the British lines surrounding Sevastopol out of driftwood and packing crates and opened its doors in March 1855. The “British Hotel” as it was called, soon thrived.

Nightingale continued her unfriendliness to Seacole’s efforts. She later described the hotel as no better than a brothel because Seacole, without outside funds, sold alcohol to support her work. Seacole, however, endeared herself to British soldiers and became famous for going to the battlefields to treat wounded men, often under fire. To identify herself as a non-combatant to Russian soldiers, she wore brightly coloured clothes and ribbons in her hair. When Sevastopol fell to British forces, Mary Seacole was the first female nurse into the beleaguered city. There she treated both British and Russian troops.

When the Crimean War ended in 1856, Seacole left the Crimea almost penniless. On her return to England, she was declared bankrupt and only the intervention of Queen Victoria’s nephew, Prince Victor of Hohenlohe-Langenburg, saved her from destitution. The Prince helped set up a charitable fund for Seacole that people from across Britain donated to, including, surprisingly, Florence Nightingale.

In 1857 Seacole attempted to raise funds to travel to India to assist with the wounded in the Indian Rebellion. Her business partner, Day, persuaded her otherwise. By 1860 Mary returned to Jamaica. Short of money once more, she received support from patrons including the Prince of Wales and the Duke of Edinburgh who provided her funds to purchase land and build a modest home in Kingston. By 1870 Seacole had returned to London where she treated, amongst others, Alexandra, Princess of Wales for rheumatism. Mary Seacole died in Paddington, London on May 14, 1881. She was 76 years old.

Despite her name being almost forgotten for over one hundred years, today Mary Seacole is recognized as a pioneer in British nursing. A number of cities and universities have hospital buildings named after her including Salford, Birmingham City, and Thames Valley Universities. A much larger number of hospitals have Mary Seacole wards. In 1991 she was awarded the Jamaican Order of Merit and a few years later she was named as one of the 100 Greatest Black Britons.


Seacole’s Posthumous Legacy

Wikimedia Commons The statue of Mary Seacole outside of St. Thomas’ Hospital in London.

After her death, Mary Seacole was almost forgotten. Her achievements stayed unrecognized in the Western world for over a century — though she was memorialized in Jamaica, where significant buildings were named after her in the 1950s.

Finally, in 2004, Seacole was restored to history when she was voted the top Black Briton for her heroic efforts during the Crimean War. Three years later, she earned her place in history textbooks taught in UK primary schools — alongside Florence Nightingale.

In the 21st century, many buildings and organizations began to commemorate her by name. The Mary Seacole Research Centre was established at De Montfort University, and there are two wards named after her in the Whittington Hospital in North London.

A campaign to erect a statue in Seacole’s honor in London was launched in 2003, and in 2016 it was erected in front of the St. Thomas’ Hospital. Although it faced significant opposition from Nightingale supporters, it still sits there today, engraved with the words, “I trust that England will not forget one who nursed her sick, who sought out her wounded to aid and succour them, and who performed the last offices for some of her illustrious dead.” It is the first public statue of a named black woman in the United Kingdom.

Mary Seacole will be remembered for her heroism, in the face of great adversity and racial prejudice. As she wrote in her autobiography, “Indeed, my experience of the world…leads me to the conclusion that it is by no means the hard bad world which some selfish people would have us believe it.”

Now that you know the story of heroic doctress Mary Seacole, read about 15 other fascinating people that history forgot. Then, read about Gisella Perl, the doctor who saved lives inside Auschwitz.


Tonton videonya: Mary Seacole - A Bold Front to Fortune - Extra History - #1 (Ogos 2022).