Sawbones: A Marital Tour of Misguided Medicine - Rufus Weaver and Harriet Cole

Episode Date: August 23, 2022

In the 1880s, anatomist Rufus Weaver worked meticulously to extract and mount the human nervous system for study. The nervous system came from a woman named Harriet Cole; but how was it actually obtained? Dr. Sydnee dissects this medical mystery, which is a telling story of who in history is celebrated and who is often forgotten.Music: "Medicines" by The Taxpayers https://taxpayers.bandcamp.com/

Sawbones is a show about medical history, and nothing the hosts say should be taken as medical advice or opinion. It's for fun. Can't you just have fun for an hour and not try to diagnose your mystery boil? We think you've earned it. Just sit back, relax, and enjoy a moment of distraction from that weird growth. You're worth it. that weird growth. You're worth it. Alright, talk is about books. One, two, one, two to Saw Bones, a Marl tour of misguided medicine.

I'm your co-host, Justin McAroy. I'm Sydney McAroy. And Sydney, it occurs to me that I don't know what our episode is about. Normally, I would do a sort of like charming, dare I say, I mean, can I say, folks, the intro that sort of like obliquely leads into your topic. I don't know what it is though. It occurs to me.

Well, it occurs to me that you don't listen very closely because I ran this topic by you two days ago and said, do you think this would be a good idea? We're back in this. We're back in this. We're back in this here. Is this what you're saying? We're going to unpack this here right now. But the problem is we were watching Love Island and you can't pay attention to me when all those attractive British people are falling in love. Yep, falling out of love.

Having a good chat. Good chat, good pants. Good banter. Having the the bands. Bans, good bands. I gotta have the case of the bands in middle school. Oh, it was rough, it was a rough couple of weeks. Good crack. I got to have the case of the bands and middle scones. Oh, it was rough.

It was a rough couple of weeks. Good crack. Not after the bands. No, actually. No, not that. Quite some time. Not that kind of crack. The, you know, the one with I in there.

I did mention that it's okay. You don't have to know anything about it. You know what? Maybe that's appropriate, because this is a bit of a mystery. A bit of a mystery. And I will say, I think that, while the topic is more just about this sort of historical mystery that is medical,

that is also medical in nature, it does get into some slightly heavier things to think about in terms of what we know about history and who we know about and whose stories get told and whose voices are easily found in the annals of history and whose voices aren't. It's not, I don't preface this to say that this is like a depressing episode, but like we do get into, there are some heavier things to talk about, so just letting you know that. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that.

Well, it's also, I may be excused. No, you can't. Okay. Um, but I think it's important when we're talking about these topics to remember, uh, people specifically in this case, um, black woman who get left out of historical narratives because they're being written and told by other people. Now I'm largely wise to not hear the story about marginalized people. Now you've made me into the cat.

Thank you so much. I usually try to warn you not to make a bunch of jokes if I'm gonna talk about something a little heavier. Maybe you did warn me and it was during love island. So it's impossible to say. But it's a mystery and then there also are some heavier. There we go. That's my preface scene for it.

I just like to let people know what they're in for. I appreciate it. You know, thank you to Zach who recommended this topic. I was not familiar with it, and I'm really excited that I've learned about it. It's the story of Rufus Weaver and Harriet Cole. So we've talked about the controversy surrounding dissections, anatomical dissections on this show before.

Do you remember the doctors riot? Yes, I do. Yes. I do remember that. We had a a bit of a a kerfuffle. The doctors were doing autopsies and people thought it was. Autopsies, not really a dissections. Yeah,, because an autopsy would be for like the purpose of let's find out what happened to them. What you could do in a dissection, but I think the problem is that like the dissection does not serve in any way the person who has, you know, whose body is being dissected. And it does not necessarily serve the family or loved ones. It, you know, an autopsy could serve that purpose, right? Providing answers and closure.

I think the problem with dissection throughout history has been it serves more our general medical understanding, it furthers our knowledge, it helps the students and the doctors and all the people involved and that's a more abstract concept. And it's hard when it's a person you left to really care about those things. So anyway, we've talked about the fact that like it used to be considered immoral and it was also illegal to dissect a corpse for learning purposes, which led to unsavory extreme measures being taken. So before it was legal anywhere, a popular thing to do was grave rob.

Okay. And we've talked about that. We've talked about grave robbers. We've talked about the ways people would go about it. And like, sometimes you would hire somebody to do it. Sometimes you would like the medical students would go robves or the doctors themselves, the anatomists, whoever. And this also led to a number of ways that families would try to protect the grades of their loved ones to prevent them from being stolen. Again, there were like 17 riots

because of all this stuff. Yeah, people are really in this country. There were riots all over the world over, but that's terrible. You shouldn't grave rob, right? Like that's a moron. Like there's no excuse for that. I agree. I agree.

And specifically this tended to target families who did not have means. You know, the thought was, let's try to rob the graves of people who won't have, who either won't be missed or who won't have the resources to like do anything about it. And so this usually led to robbing the graves of either black people or poor white people. And again, being dissected at this point in history in the 19th century was seen as sacrilegious, disrespectful. Like, you would not, it was a big deal. Okay. So eventually the law changed and it allowed for certain circumstances for dissection. There were specifically like criminals who were put to death

could be dissected. For a while, people who died by suicide could be someone who could be somebody whose body wasn't claimed. There were a variety of reasons why it was legal, but only under these circumstances, before we got to the situation today, where we understand that these are, that donating your body is a willful act. You can decide it.

You can decide it ahead of time, and you can do so in a manner that would be respectful of you and your family and all that stuff, right? So with that all in mind, and I think it's just important to keep that sort of progression in mind, because this is the story of a particular dissection that was performed, and the person who we think is the subject of this dissection. Oh wow. And we are not sure, okay,

because there are a lot of questions, maybe as many questions as answers in this story. So first of all, let's talk about the anatomist. His name was Dr. Rufus Weaver. He was born in 1841 in Gettysburg, and he became a doctor in 1865 at the Pennsylvania Medical College. Now he studied a couple different places and he was about to pursue his major career

where he would end up working the rest of his life as the chief anatomist at the Hanuman Medical College, which is now Drexel University of College of Medicine. But there was a tragedy in his life that occurred right as he had gotten this new position. His father died. So his father, Samuel Weaver, died suddenly. There was an accident, some sort of railroad accident. And beyond obviously the loss, he was also presented with this new task. His father prior to his death had been contracted by the Ladies Memorial Association

to identify and remove the bodies of South Carolina soldiers from the fields at Gettysburg. So there were all these remains from the battle outside. No one knew who was who. And the idea was Samuel Weaver was going to go by the task of figuring out who everyone was and repatriating these bodies. Okay, not science. This is for, on our very own. Just like so families can have their, yes.

Yeah, exactly. So anyway, because his father passed away, the son stepped in to do this work. And this is sort of like the first way he makes a name for himself. Is it like, he's, it's, it, it, it suits him well. He's, he anatomy is his thing. He is not bothered as many may be by such a task. You know, I mean, you can imagine that's a hard thing.

Strong, strong stomach. Right. And I would say probably like a very like pragmatic kind of person to do that too. Like not necessarily emotionally affected by it either. Okay. And so he goes about this work starting in 1871 and he went on to identify the remains of over 3,000 soldiers. Yeah.

Which again, using the forensic methods of the time must have been quite a feat. So, after this, he settles into Hanuman to do what he really wanted to do, the thing he loved most, dissect things. Yes, he wanted to dissect things. At this time, this said that was a repatriating body, it was just a side hustle. His real passion, dissecting bodies. I mean, yes, great. Great. hustle. His real passion dissecting bodies. I mean, yes, great. That was his real passion. Towards the end of the 1800s, we are just

seen around this time, the laws are changing to allow for dissection at all. We're moving into a time where you could dissect, again, the bodies of criminals or something. But dissection is still controversial. It's still something that the average person in the public would not want to donate their body for or their loved ones, you know, that was still sort of its its view by the public. And so and and because the idea that it was legal at all was still newish, there weren't a lot of what we call prosections available, meaning like models that had been dissected of like maybe a specific

part of the human body and preserved and displayed. So sort of like a... So you could look at them. Yeah, because there are waves of... We've been to the bodies exhibit. There are waves of preserving a diet. Once you've done a dissection, preserve it so other people can look at it and study it. There weren't a ton of those available. And they are hard sometimes to create depending on what you're doing. I've worked, actually, I did an elective where I helped create a process action. Oh, how was that?

Does it will it upset you if I tell you that I enjoyed the work? No, it will, nothing me because I know you and have known you for over two decades now. I am completely unspriced. My opinion of you has not changed one Iota. So we have to be here. It is important to, it was especially at the time, even now, but especially the time. It was important to have real models of what things looked like inside

the human body because we didn't have an easy way of looking inside the human body at this point. There are a lot more methods of seeing without actually causing death. But at the time, if you want to look inside somebody's body, that was a dangerous prospect. So creating these pro-sections was one of the things that he really wanted to do, was to do, dissect things, and he was in charge of the anatomical museum, which a lot of people had sort of taken the view up until now that like the anatomical museum is full of sort of curiosities that you can come in and go

whoo more of a side show atmosphere and he really wanted it to be about learning he really wanted to create a lot of things and and also store things like I don't know like a kidney stone so not just dissections but things from the human body in a way that would help further the education of students and doctors. Okay. Okay. So he sets about filling the anatomical museum with bones and stones and organs and tumors and limbs and there's lots of articles written about him like talking about the beauty of different organs. I can see what you and this did should hung out.

Well, I don't know. It's like a lot of historical figures. It's questionable sometimes. He wasn't much for documentation. I do, I empathize with that deeply. I am not much for documentation. No, I don't like to write things down. I like to do things. I like to do things.

I like to do things. But I am a, I am just a family doctor. No scribes for us. Yeah. No. So we do have to write things down. He didn't. He's the mention that a scribe is like someone

who writes down your notes and stuff. Yes, yes. And a scribe, yes. Has it sounds very old timing? No. No, what was that? Last cut you did? Oh, Dr. McAroy, you do have a way with a scalpel. What about me right all this time?

It is important. Was it my mock? You just dropped on them. It is imperative in medicine that you document, not as sometimes you will be told for billing purposes, but because it's important to communicate to future you, as well as other medical professionals, what you did and what you found and what you saw and what your patient told you. So documentation is very important, however it is also, it takes up a lot of time. Yeah. And now that it's on the computer, for some of us it can take up even more

time, and so some medical specialties. And maybe some family doctors out there too, just not me, are provided with a scribe, which is someone who sits in the room with you while you see patients and does your notes. Record's what's happening, so that you can focus on doing it. I, that would be delightful for me, because I like doing things, and I love talking to people,

and I love listening to people. I don't like writing things down. He didn't either, he didn't write much down. So a lot of, and it love talking to people and I love listening to people. I don't like writing things down. He didn't either. He didn't write much down. So a lot of, and it's important to know that because a lot of the accounts of like this whole thing are from other people because he didn't write it down. So other people wrote about how he did the work he did. He just liked to do the work.

And it's very delicate work, especially at this time there wasn't an easy playbook for a lot of the stuff he did. There were manuals. I don't want to say that nobody had done this before. There were manuals on dissection, of course, and there were methods that were known, but you had to approach everything with a little bit of a, maybe there's a better tool, maybe there's a better preservative, maybe there's something I hadn't thought of, you know. Like there were different substances to inject into like veins or arteries to sort of open them up, make them appear bigger so

that you can see them more easily. So like people, you know, we're kind of trying different things out with like oil and lid and wax and resin and all these different things to try to find the best way to do this. And it would take a lot of time and a very delicate hand so that you didn't damage anything. Of course, yeah. As you're doing it. So the problem is he was doing all these different disactions. But there was one that he really wanted to do

that he couldn't find a good model or information on how to do. So that was one thing he was looking for, right? Like how have other people approached this? There was no great anatomical dissection of the human nervous system. Oh, that's tricky because that's really like thin and there's lots of it. Exactly. So, nervous system in one of those bodies exhibits, holy crap. It's wild. They're small.

They are. They're delicate. They're hard to spot sometimes. I know that sounds weird, but as someone who took an anatomy class and part of my tests were to like go in and Look at labeled structures and write down like what's number one? What's number two? Sometimes a nerve is hard to find. It looks like Generally these like then White creamy whitish like or whitish grayish maybe

white creamy whitish, like, or whitish grayish, maybe, cord, but they're, I mean, they're very delicate. Like summer thicker, it depends on what nerves you're talking about. Some nerves are thicker, almost like an old fashioned telephone like with a corded telephone. I mean, when you plug into the wall. Let's be honest about nerves. Summer really teeny.

Let's be honest about nerves. These things are probably the most faulty thing in the human body, which is incredible and immaculately designed. But nerves are the thing where like, yeah, I've actually, imagine I've perfected the design of the human body. Oh really? Everything? Yes.

There's one issue that if you sit weird for like 10 minutes, your legs don't work anymore for like another five minutes after that. That's one, oh, and they heart and tingle. It's just one bad thing about nerves. And we did it in one thing where someone pinches you the right way, you'll black it. But nerves are pretty good other than that. And also if you hit this one,

I mean, it's a big star trick thing. Uh, I mean, no, it's not, it's not really that there are ways. Uh, you know the Vulcan nerve pinch and you've never taught me. It also like if you hit your elbow, it will hurt so bad. Yeah, the funny one, right? Is that your funny one? Like you're really hitting a nerve. Yeah, anyway, so, um, he couldn't find a good model of that because it's really hard

to do. It's very fragile, very tedious. You can break them very easily while you're dissecting. I can, I can, I can test to that. And he even toured Europe looking for one. Like where are some examples? So many. Please.

So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. So many.

So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. So many. or because are Michaels. A lot of times if I can't find something, I'll check one of those. So you should have tried five. You think they would have had a complete dissection of the human nervous system? And he's a prize. And I will say like what he was setting out to do was the cerebrospinal nervous system. Some of the nerves in our human bodies are so small, this would be impossible.

So this is, it's that specific part of the nervous system. So anyway, he decided he had to do it and His colleagues even thought he was like this is ridiculous like they were mad about it Like why would you do this? This is gonna waste time and energy. You're gonna go, you know You're gonna harm your eyes looking for these tiny things You will be come to front Doug's not even sure they exist. I'm sticking by that.

However, he went on to do it. And I want to tell you how he accomplished it. Okay. But first we got to go to the billing department. Let's go. It could happen to you. You're all grown up now, a professional adult with diverse interests and hobbies, and one of those hobbies is video games. You just can't help it, they're so good now. If that's you, we're here to tell you, you are completely normal.

I'm Maddie Myers. I'm Jason Shire. And I'm Kirk Hamilton. And together, we form Triple Click, a podcast about video games. If you think you might be a person who likes video games, we hope you'll give Triple Click a listen. Triple Click, new episodes every Thursday on Maximum Fun. Hey, kid. Your dad tell you about the time he broke Steven Dwarf's nose at the kid's

choice awards. In Dead Pilots Society, scripts that were developed by studios and networks, but were never produced, are given the table reads they deserve. When I was a kid I had to spend my Christmas break filming a PSA about Angel Dust, so yeah being a kid sucks sometimes Presented by Andrew Reich and Ben Blacker dead pilot society twice a month on MaximumFun.org You know the show you like thag hobo with a scarf who lives in a magic dumpster Dr. Hume. Yeah.

All right, so how did this, how did this cat get nervous? Okay, so in 1888, let me just tell you this part and then we'll talk about how, how did he obtain this? In 1888, he said about it anyway. He had obtained a cadaver. He worked for around six solid months and like reportedly 10 hour days. And again, all of this is secondhand and sometimes much later information because he didn't always write a lot of things down. But like long,

long days for months and months on end to meticulously dissect out the entire cerebral spinal nervous system. He did, it was noted by him that it was actually even harder to mount it than it was to dissect it out, which I would highly advise as I'm talking about this, if you Google or if you search, you don't have to use Google, you can use whatever search engine you want. Sure. Yeah. If you look up, you can use whatever search engine you want. Sure. Yeah. If you look up, some of your other favorites in ask jeeps.

I was hoping you'd say ask jeeps. Dog pile. Oh, certainly not dog pile. Like us. If you, if you search for Harriet call nervous system, or if you look up a roofish weaver nervous system, any of these, you will easily find that the heri it the heri it Heria call is usually what it's named

This you can look at this dissection and you can see why it would have been very difficult to mount as well as perform Are you looking at it? Yeah, I can tell you're looking at it. Okay, so He was Celebrated once this was done. It was such a huge accomplishment. Nobody had done it at that point. Even to this day, I will say, people have tried to reproduce this perfectly. And even the ones that do the same thing or come pretty close

have said they have no idea how he accomplished it. So it was written about, it was touted, it was toured, it went to the world's fair, you know. It's a big achievement. It was a big achievement. It was restored in 1960. There's another big article in life and stuff about it at the time. After it was restored and it still hangs in the hall

at Drexel's Queen Lane campus on display for anybody who wants to come look at it and many people do. So, what is the other part of the story? So we have this story and that's what, you know, initially when you read like accounts of of this of Harriet, we will call that, that is what they named the actual object itself, like the the framed, this is Harriet. So if you're if you're in mystery books a lot, you like a little out of the Christie or her cure pro books, not or the her cure pro is a

Christie character, but there's like a like a hanging clue or like a thing about the the story where it's like, well, wait a minute, what about this? And I feel like that's the identity of the, of the cadaver. Where did this body come from? Where did Harriet come from? Where did Harriet come from? Exactly. I think, and I think that's the thing that it's really intriguing when historians take the time to go back and find that history.

And certainly there are many who are doing this, not just the, the three who I will, I will mention who have, I have followed a lot of the work they've done to sort of piece together this other part of the narrative. Alaina McNaughton, Matt Herbison, and Brandon Zimmerman, who are three researchers, historians, two of them had worked at Drexel initially, which is sort of how they came in contact with it. I think their jobs have changed,

but this is a mystery that all three have been involved in trying to solve, trying to find some sort of primary sources or something from that time period that might help them unlock. So we know that now we use the name Harriet to describe this person. Again, it's sort of become like it's the name of the dissection as well as the name of perhaps the person. Okay. The initial work when it was displayed and taken to the world's fair and all that, they didn't talk at all about that. There was just no mention in those early records of who this might, who's brain is this, who's eyes are these.

There was just no mention of any of that. The first time they even, all they talk about is Weaver. The first time they even mentioned that there was someone as in 1902, so years after it was performed, 1888, as one was done. And they mentioned someone named Henrietta and say this was a 35 year old person named Henrietta

who the nerves belong to. That's about it. Not much else. In 1916, there's another article and in this they do name her, but again her name changes. Harriet Cole. Well, that's weird because that's the name of the dissection. Well, that's why we named it that, not. But it is not clear in 1916 where this name came from. Okay. Where did the person who is talking about it? We're talking about it. Like, what, 20 years after the dissection originally? Huh.

Yeah, longer. Yeah. Yeah. So, I'm not a big, big now. Yeah, longer. Yeah. Yeah. So anyway, and still if you read these early descriptions, there's there's this sort of implication that whoever this person is, Harriet Cole in this 1916 example, she was elevated to greatness by weaver. Like, it doesn't really matter because the important part of her life. Learning her life. Learning her life.

Every day life. She got the chance of a, well, it's gonna say lifetime, but that's not technically accurate. She was brought to cultural relevance. The important thing about her is this. And it's sort of like the way it's worded is almost like this greatness was thrust upon her. Yeah, right. Is this. And it's sort of like the way it's worded is almost like this greatness

was thrust upon her. Right. Sort of insinuating that it wasn't her choice. Now all that being said in 1960 when they did the restoration of the work, that is where you see the myth sort of cemented and the story changed somewhat. So in Life magazine, they talk about the guy who's restoring it and they talk about Riffits Weaver and they talk about the work and Drexel and all that. But they also talk about a 35-year-old black woman named Harriet Cole who worked at the college as a housekeeper. She cleaned the floors. And the way they'd talk about her is that she was fascinated.

She would peek around the corners to look at dissections and listen in on anatomy lectures and was very intrigued by all of this. So much so that she had been diagnosed with tuberculosis. She knew that she was very sick and that there was a chance she could die. And so she went to Rufus Weaver and told him that she would like to donate her body to him upon death so that he could, you know, create one of these dissections using her using her body. And this is really important to the story at this point, because it's a gift then.

Then it is a noble act, you know, for science. Which is how we view, again, giving your body to science today is viewed as something deeply noble and honorable and to be respected. And so this is how it was cast. The problem is we don't actually have any record to say that that is true. So these three researchers that I've mentioned have gone back and looked through, and it's

really interesting because if you go to the Drexel University Legacy Center Archives and Special Collections, you can go look at all this online. They will walk you through what they know about Harriet, which is always in quotes, because we don't know for sure if it was Harriet. And what they what they think at this point. So we know that there was someone named Harriet Cole who lived in Philadelphia in the 1880s. Okay. They have gone back to historical records and they found that there was this woman that existed. She was a domestic worker.

We know that. So she would have cleaned, you know, we know that. And at the time of her death in 1888, which was recorded as being from tuberculosis. So again, this all sort of fits, that her body was, that her final resting place resting place was at the Hanman medical college, which would again, and I know that seems like, well, why would her final resting place be at a college? Well, that is the way you would have worded it at the time. If someone did have their body, well, we won't say donated.

If someone's body was unclaimed and therefore available for dissection. I understand. Because that's the other thing at the time, if you died and nobody claimed your remains, you could be by authorities given to an anatomist, given to a medical school. That was okay at the time. So we have this sort of like, this fits perfectly, right? This makes a lot of sense.

We know that a woman fitting this description existed at this time. We don't know that she worked at the college, but we know she did do the work that we're saying that Harriet did. We know that her body did end up there. So this all seems to fit. She died of tuberculosis. She was the right age. All of this would make sense.

The part of it, though, that doesn't make sense is that at this point, in 1888, almost no one donated their bodies to science, almost no one donated their bodies for dissection. So it wouldn't necessarily have occurred to her like I should do this because it was so uncommon. It was incredibly uncommon. It was still something that was often feared by the general public. Because even just the idea that that would happen to you, there was a lot of sort of like spiritual concerns. So what that would mean for your soul if that happened to your body. And so it would

not have at all been common. Moreover, the only people who did, like if you go back, not so much necessarily in 1888, but into the years following that in the early 1900s. If you go back and look at the kind of people who did intentionally donate their body to be dissected, knowing that that was what was going to happen. If you look at people who did that, they were almost without fail wealthy white men. Very the legacy. Very commonly commonly men who worked in medical science fields. Okay. And even more commonly people who believed in phrenology. Because they wanted you to look at their amazing brains. I love it. You got to get a look at this thing. It's amazing.

This is so the toxic masculinity of like, I need you to see how awesome my brain is. Like, that's fine, you can learn or whatever. I just want you to see how great my brain is. I'm the guy who invented paper clips. So yeah, I think you want to get up there and take a look around. Cause what is going on with this thing?

So it, it's just, it is very suspect. Okay. I'm not saying it's impossible. All things are possible. You're not saying it's impossible. I'm just saying it is incredibly suspect to believe that, let's say that the Heria Cole we found record of existing, is the Heria Cole whose body, Rufus Weaver dissected and created this, you know, display of the human nervous

system. Let's say it is the same person. The idea that she did that willingly, that she donated her body to do so is very difficult to digest. We have found no record of her of that donation. We have found no proof that she worked there. So those are both problems. But I think what it highlights is that the focus in this story initially was just on him, and this allowed this giant hole in history to happen, where because no one was keeping

account of her, of who she was. And I can't even, I mean, I can't even attest for certain. I keep saying her. I don't know for sure that it's a woman. You can't do, by the way, I thought about this. Can you like test the DNA? Can we go in? Because there's biological material in there. Because of the lead pain and things that we're used

to preserve it. The DNA would be so degraded, it would be very difficult to find anything there. And you might destroy it. And so no one really has an interest in pain for that, or even thinking there'd be anything to find anything there and you might destroy it. And so no one really has an interest in paying for that or even thinking there'd be anything to find. Because even if you did figure out it's a woman, then what? Right.

I don't know. You know, that doesn't help us that much. So her story could have been told if it had been preserved alongside his, right? You need that account because if you let all that time elapse before you go back and consider who that was, you miss the opportunity. Is there a record where Shia was employed by the college? We don't know, we can't find it. Is there a record of her donation, of any record of them interacting? Did we ask him? Did anybody say, did you know Harriet Cole? What's her name? Did anybody ask?

Was there interest? And I think that it's really amazing and cool when you see historians doing this kind of work because informing us about the past and who was left out of it hopefully inspires us to stop leaving people out in the history that we're creating today and to make sure that everyone's voices and everyone accounts and everyone's

perspective is represented in the histories that people will read a hundred years from now. So I found it a very, I mean it's a sad mystery, it's you know, it's sad to think how often especially black, are left out of the narrative of history, and hopefully by recognizing that and learning from that, we do better, right? We fix that and make sure that that's not the truth in the future. So I would encourage you, if you're interested in that, like I said, the three historians I mentioned have done a ton of work and you can go to the Drexel Archives and read about all the work they've done to try to piece this together,

to try to tell us more about Harriet Cole, who was she, and let's know her for more than just this amazing gift that students were given for years. Let's recognize who she was and recognize if maybe it wasn't a gift, and reckon with that. Yeah. Well, thank you, Sydney. Thank you for sharing that story with us, and thanks to you for listening.

I sure appreciate you being here. Thanks to the taxpayers for using their song medicines as the intro and outro of our program, and thank you to you for listening. Hope you enjoyed yourself, and I hope you'll join us again next time. For Salmons. Until then, my name is Justin McRoy. I'm Sydney McRoy. And as always, don't drill a hole in your head. Alright!