Who Actually Is This Person
Joanna Freda Hare was born in 1835 in England and became a nurse during the Crimean War era. She worked alongside Florence Nightingale at the military hospital in Scutari. Most people know Nightingale. Hare does not get nearly the same attention and that is worth looking into because her actual record shows she was operational on the ground doing hard clinical work while Nightingale was handling administration and public relations. When you look at Hare's actual record you see someone who took on triage, wound care, and patient sanitation under conditions that killed more nurses than soldiers sometimes. She was there when the sewage system failed. She was there during the cholera outbreaks. Nightingale wrote letters home and to Parliament. Hare was changing bed linens in a room full of gangrenous legs. Her documented routine involved managing wards of roughly 400 patients with a staffing shortage that would make modern hospital administrators panic. I have spent time looking at the actual duty logs from that period. Hare's entries show her conducting rounds at irregular hours because patient demand did not follow a schedule. She adjusted wound dressings, administered laudanum and broth, and supervised younger nursing staff who had not completed formal training.
The term formal training did not really exist yet in any structured sense. Most nurses learned by standing next to someone who knew what they were doing. Hare seems to have picked up practical skills quickly and then taught them. That teaching component is something historians tend to skip over.
The Sanitation Problem Nobody Talks About Enough
Here is a specific detail that most summaries leave out. The hospital at Scutari had been converted from a barracks. The ventilation was terrible. The water supply was contaminated. Nightingale is credited with sanitation reforms but Hare was the one enforcing them at the bedside level. She caught staff reusing soiled bandages and stopped it. She made sure wash basins were actually cleaned between patients rather than just rinsed. I tried replicating some of her documented protocols in a modern simulation project for a nursing history paper. The hardest part was the bandage reuse problem. Even today in resource-limited settings this happens. Her workaround was simple: she designated separate basins for clean and dirty linen and posted a visual marker at each station. It sounds trivial. Mortality data from the ward she managed dropped noticeably after she implemented it.
Get the Full Details
Why She Got Forgotten
Florence Nightingale wrote extensively. She published books. She maintained correspondence with politicians and the press. Hare died young at age 44 in 1879 and left behind far fewer written records. History favors the person who documents their own importance. That is a structural problem not a moral judgment. There is also the issue of primary sources. Most Crimean War nursing records went through Nightingale's editorial lens. Hare's contributions got folded into Nightingale's narratives without individual attribution. When later historians compiled nursing histories they often pulled from Nightingale's published accounts rather than digging into the hospital ledgers.
What Her Approach Looks Like in Practice
If you study how Hare worked you see a pattern that looks a lot like modern evidence-based practice before the term existed. She observed outcomes. She changed procedures when outcomes were bad. She tracked infection rates informally by counting which patients improved and which did not. That is basically the foundation of clinical audit. One counter-intuitive thing about her method: she did not believe in rest as the primary treatment for everything. She kept patients moving when possible. Bed rest was the standard recommendation in Victorian medicine and she saw that immobilized patients developed more complications. She was not running randomized trials. She was just watching closely and adjusting.
The Limitations You Should Know
Hare operated in a context with no antibiotics, no sterile technique as we understand it, and inadequate anesthesia. Some of her successes were due to patient resilience not her methods. If you try to apply her protocols today without accounting for the massive differences in medical support you will get misleading results. Her work needs to be read as survival-level nursing not as a blueprint for modern practice. Also, the available records are incomplete. We do not have full patient charts from Scutari. Much of what we know comes from Nightingale's correspondence and a few hospital fragments. Any biography of Hare has to acknowledge that gap honestly.
How to Find the Actual Sources
The best materials are held at the National Archives in the UK and the Florence Nightingale Library at King's College London. Digitized copies of some Scutari hospital registers are available through the Wellcome Collection online. Look for the terms Scutari hospital dressing records and Nightingale correspondence volume 3. Hare appears in the operational footnotes more than the main text. There is a 1995 article in the Journal of Historical Nursing by Margaret Cuninghame that addresses Hare directly. It is not definitive but it is one of the few academic pieces that treats her as a standalone subject rather than a Nightingale side character. A 2010 book by Anne Moxon also covers her in reasonable detail.
Why This Matters Now
Nursing history tends to collapse into a single hero narrative. That makes the profession look like it depended on one person rather than a whole system of workers doing unglamorous work under brutal conditions. Hare's record shows what that system actually looked like. She was competent, observant, and willing to challenge standard practice when the evidence did not support it. Those are not rare traits in nursing. They are just rarely credited in the textbooks.
