In Medical Lives in the Age of Surgical Revolution, Anne Crowther and Marguerite Dupree trace the careers of a cohort of nearly two thousand medical students who matriculated at the University of Glasgow and the University of Edinburgh between 1866 and 1875. These students’ careers were marked by many of the most significant changes in the field of medicine in the nineteenth century. The students began their studies after the passage of the Medical Act of 1858. Many were students when women began to enter the medical profession; the group includes Sophia Jex-Blake and the women who joined her efforts to gain medical training at the University of Edinburgh in 1869. Perhaps the most important development for Crowther and Dupree's purposes was Joseph Lister's work on antiseptic surgical techniques. Lister taught at both medical schools, and his students absorbed his techniques and, through their various professional careers, spread his ideas around the British Empire. Thus, as Crowther and Dupree write, “This book tries to define one medical generation, at a particularly significant period in the history of imperial power and medical knowledge” (9).

Crowther and Dupree spend the first four chapters discussing the cohort as students and young practitioners. Their education at the Scottish medical schools was different from that offered in London—the perception at the time was that a Scottish training was more scientific. Lister's instruction reflected the more scientific approach. One of the key features most of the students picked up was Lister's experimentation—he constantly tinkered with the details of his technique, and, as a result, many of his students later experimented to adapt the technique to their own circumstances, while still identifying themselves as Listerians. The students also felt strong ties to their respective universities throughout their careers. The authors effectively argue that the social networks of their families and those created at medical school would be crucial for these students.

In chapter 6, the authors examine the varieties of practice adopted by the group as their careers matured. The problem of distinguishing between general practice and growing specialties is well illustrated, as many of these doctors blended general practice with some medical specialty. This was also the last generation of general practitioners who were expected and able to perform complex surgical operations in their homes or those of their patients. Lister's significance is evident again here—some general practitioners in the cohort were more willing to perform surgery because the alternative was sending patients to surgeons who did not practice antiseptic techniques, while others used their knowledge of antiseptic surgery to expand into specialties such as obstetrics and ophthalmology.

Crowther and Dupree argue that Lister tied the group together more clearly than any other factor, and they devote three chapters to examining Listerism as the cohort adopted it and then spread Lister's teachings throughout Britain and the empire. The adoption of Listerian techniques made these doctors more dependent on each other—antiseptic surgery required several sets of trained hands, and the cohort often called on each other for this support. Just over 20 percent of the group practiced outside of Britain, and many of these doctors practiced in primitive conditions, which encouraged them to follow Lister's lead in experimenting with antiseptic techniques to make them more manageable for a single practitioner with few resources or in a small hospital far from metropolitan amenities. Antiseptic surgery also provided a much-needed success for Western medicine, which struggled to control tropical diseases and thus held little appeal for native populations.

The book closes with a look at the last days of the cohort members. By the Boer War, their surgical techniques had become mainstream. By the beginning of World War I, most members of the cohort were too old to serve on the front, although many delayed retirement or returned to practice on the home front so that younger doctors could join the military. Medical women directly benefited, as their service was also desperately needed.

The medical women represent perhaps the only real weakness in this study. Obviously, as part of the cohort, they must be included. However, Crowther and Dupree chose to devote chapter 5 to the education and careers of Jex-Blake and the women who joined her in matriculating at Edinburgh, and this chapter interrupted the flow of the larger argument. Of particular trouble was the fact that Lister refused to allow these women into his classes. Thus, while the men of the cohort were closely tied not just by their Edinburgh and Glasgow degrees but also by their access to Listerism (whether or not they accepted the technique), the women of the cohort not only were denied Edinburgh degrees but also only gained knowledge of Listerian techniques second- or thirdhand. While many of them did adopt some form of antiseptic surgery and while clearly the network they formed as medical women was crucial to their careers, the parallels to the rest of the cohort were thin. Devoting a chapter to them drew more attention to the women than the overall argument of the book warrants; it would have been more appropriate to address their role as the authors did that of homeopathic members of the cohort, by including them in the general narrative rather than separating them out. Nonetheless, Crowther and Dupree have produced an impressive and important analysis of the medical profession in nineteenth-century Britain by examining the trajectories of the careers of members of the matriculating classes of two of the largest medical schools in the empire.