Providentia

Reading the Bumps (Part 2 of 2)

Continued from Part 1

Born in Steuben Country, New York in 1809, Orson Fowler attended Amherst College in Massachusetts.  While attending school there, he developed a keen interest in phrenology which he shared with his best friend, Henry Ward Beecher.   While Beecher went into ministry work after their graduation in  1834, Fowler had other ideas.  He and his brother, Lorenzo Fowler opened a phrenology office in New York City and launched a series of public lectures on phrenology, physiology,  psychology, and social reform.   Orson Fowler also became a popular writer and editor of the American Phrenological Journal and placed his own stamp on American phrenology by launching one of the largest mail-order firms in New York City.   At the height of the phrenology craze, Fowler's New York offices attracted as many visitors as the nearby museum run by P.T. Barnum.    Along with phrenology, the Fowlers also promoted a new "scientific" system of shorthand called phonography (they called it scientific since it was based on a specific set of rules).   Not that the Fowler family believed in limiting themselves in any way.   Orson's wife Lydia and sister, Charlotte, were both active suffragettes and the Fowler offices in New York became a gathering place where people could discuss anything from abolishing slavery (pre-Civil War) to the crusade against alcohol (did I forget to mention that they were also temperance movement supporters?). 

Although the American Phrenological Journal that Fowler edited folded up by 1842,  his company did brisk business with a range of other products.  Along with books and pamphlets (mostly written by Orson Fowler),  the company also sold phrenological charts, measuring tapes, craniometers, and the classic china Phrenology Heads which are still collectors' items today.     The Fowler brothers also took their show across the country as part of a regular lecture circuit although they often faced attacks by skeptics denouncing phrenology as "quackery".   While both Fowlers defended the science behind their work, that claim became harder to defend as mainstream medical researchers withdrew support.  Still, the Fowler brothers carried on their crusade and insisted that phrenology had just as much right to be labelled a science as mathematics, astronomy, or natural history.   Orson Fowler also stressed the theological importance of phrenology, which revealed "the hand-writing of God" since its principles, like all scientific truths as far as he was concerned,  were "of divine origin".    Lorenzo Fowler even argued that phrenologists were completing the work that Jesus Christ started in reforming human behaviour.

As for the Orson Fowler book in my collection, it seems fairly typical of the phrenological literature that he sold through his company.   The book's introduction begins with:  "Reproduction is Nature's paramount work;  because to all else what foundation is to house- its sine qua non.  It has its SCIENCE, or natural laws, prescribed modus operandi and, and instrumentalities.  GENDER IS ITS MASTER WORKMAN, and Nature's "male and female" arrangement, with its governing law, her chose "ways and means" or originating all life: which growth completes."   Covering nine sections in all, the book includes sections such as "Gender and Sexuality", "Love", "Sexual Selection", "Married Life",  "Generation" (the polite Victorian euphemism for sexual intercourse), "Maternity",  and "Sexual Restoration".    Despite these being taboo topics during the Victorian era in which Fowler was writing, his tenuous claim to medical expertise enabled him to present his phrenological advice in the form of a marriage manual for concerned adults trying to deal with different aspects of human sexuality.   While Orson Fowler proudly inserted the word "science" into his book as much as he could (usually in capital letters), there was very little, if any, empirical testing of the elaborate claims that he made in his book.  He certainly didn't believe in referencing his "facts" and, despite abundant illustrations, there doesn't seem to be any citations (aside from his own works).   The book also contains surprising little phrenology and mostly deals with Victorian ideals about the proper age for teaching children about sexual matters and the need for a "scientific" approach to sex and love.   The book seems to say more about Fowler's personal biases than any attempt at scientific objectivity.   As well, his insistence that producing children was the ultimate purpose for any sexual act marked him very much as a man of his time. 

Whenever critics  accused him of being more interested in making money than actually promoting phrenology, Orson Fowler simply defended himself by saying that he worked so hard because "I loved the science!".     Still,  the decline had begun setting in after 1860 and Lorenzo Fowler, sensing that the market was drying up, moved to Great Britain in 1863 to continue his phrenology crusade there.  Although Charlotte Fowler took over running the company and a new generation of Fowlers came on board to help with the mail-order business, phrenology's day was definitely past.  By the time Orson Fowler died in 1887, phrenology was just one of many different "sciences" being promoted by travelling hucksters giving lectures across the country.    As the phrenology market dried up, the ex-phrenologists drifted on to more profitable ventures, including spiritualist research and more evolutionary explanations for human behaviourism.  

Beginning in the 1870s,  Social Darwinist theories based (loosely) on Darwin's theory of evolution grew in popularity and social reformers shifted away from phrenology-based social reform towards improving human behaviour through "good breeding".  As phrenology societies faded, eugenics societies formed on both sides of the Atlantic with credible scientists using their research to boost the idea of improving society through genetics  (especially Charles Darwin's cousin, Francis Galton).   But that's another story.

While phrenologists tried every marketing strategy that they could, including the developing of mechanical phrenology devices (which I once tried myself at an American Psychological Association convention),  American phrenology never survived Orson Fowler's death.  Despite phrenology fading in the United States, the movement staggered on in parts of Europe despite most scientists denouncing its validity.   Several early 20th scientists, such as Bernard Hollander in the United Kingdom and Paul Bouts in Belgium, tried repackaging phrenology to make it more acceptable but their efforts are largely forgotten today. 

Although phrenology has long since been relegated to obscurity, the legacy that Gall, Spurzheim, and Fowler left behind still lingers.   Various pseudoscientific schemes for classifying people still enjoy some popularity, whether through classifying people by blood-type,  graphology (handwriting), or astrology, although none of them seem to have ever enjoyed the scientific respectability that phrenology could claim (at first).    

Unfortunately, while pseudoscientific movements can be easily dismissed, more scientifically validated methods of personality classification using psychometric testing are prone to misuse as well (and often are).   Various media psychologists selling unscientific advice to the public through self-help books, radio, and television appearances often rely on the same selling strategies that worked for Orson Fowler,  however briefly.    Failing to acknowledge the very real scientific limits of psychology will almost certainly catch up to them in time however.   Whether the current pundits can learn from Orson Fowler's example remains to be seen.

 

 

 

 

Reading The Bumps (Part 1 of 2)

One thing you could say about phrenologist and author, Orson Squire Fowler,  he certainly knew how to grab your attention.

Part of my collection of rare psychology books is an 1875 volume by Fowler.  The title certainly leaves little to the imagination: 

"Creative and Sexual Science: or Manhood, Womanhood, and Their Mutual Interrelations;  Love, Its Law, Power, ETC.;  Selection, or Mutual Adaptation; Courtship, Married Life, and PERFECT CHILDREN;  Their Generation, Endowment, Paternity, Maternity, Bearing, Nursing and Rearing; Together with Puberty,, Boyhood, Girlhood, ETC.;  SEXUAL IMPAIRMENTS RESTORED, Male Vigor ad Female Health and Beauty Perpetuated ad Augmented, ETC.,  as Taught By PHRENOLOGY AND PHYSIOLOGY " 

(Fowler was showman enough to make sure that the most important words were carefully capitalized). 

Got all that?  Good.   But more on that later after I provide a little background on the beginnings of phrenology.

Although the idea that mental abilities were linked to specific locations in the brain dates back to Aristotle, true scientific work into the nature of brain functioning didn't begin until the late 18th century.   While early visionaries such as Emmanuel Swedenborg made some inspired guesses about how the brain worked, it was German neuroanatomist Franz Joseph Gall who can properly be considered the father of phrenology (not that he ever used that term).   After establishing his reputation as one of Austria's most prominent physicians, Gall turned his research interests to the human brain and developed the first true theory of cerebral localization.  By 1792, he began lecturing on his idea that the human cerebral cortex was actually a mosaic made up of different specialized organs.  Although many of his ideas were actually correct, including his observations on the significance of cerebral hemispheres and the importance of the frontal lobes in complex thinking, the pseudosciene linked to Gall's name has largely overshadowed his reputation as a medical pioneer.    The premises that Gall laid out in his lectures were that:

1. the brain is the organ of the mind,
2.  the mind is made up of seperate annd discrete faculties,
3. each faculty must have its own "seat" or organ in the brain,
4.   the size of each organ is a direct measure of its relative importance in the mind,
5.   the shape of the brain is determined by how each organ developed,
6. since the skull is formed from the shape of the brain, measuring the skull can provide an accurate assessment of individual aptitudes and tendencies.    

Gall identified nineteen mental faculties which he considered to be essentially animal in nature, these included "reproductive instinct," "love of one's offspring," "affection," "destructiveness or tendency to murder," and "desire to possess things."   In contrast, he also identified a series of exclusively human qualities such as "wisdom", "satire and wit", "sense of metaphysics",  "religious sentiment", and firmness of purpose".  

Public reaction to Gall's lectures were decidedly mixed.   Despite the lectures being popular, conservative Catholic authorities and even some of his medical colleagues accused him of subversion for daring to suggest that the brain was the centre of intellect rather than the soul (the Austrian empire was still Catholic at that time). Although Gall defended himself and his theories as much as he could, he was ordered to stop lecturing in 1801.   Realizing that he would never be allowed to teach freely in Austria, Gall went into exile to could teach and continue his brain research.   Along with giving lectures and public demonstrations of dissections in Denmark, Holland, Switzerland, and France, he took a keen interest in the brains of convicted criminals and gathered further material for his writings on brain functioning.    Settling in Paris in 1807, Gall began writing his masterpiece, ,  The Anatomy and Physiology of the Nervous System in General, and of the Brain in Particular, with Observations upon the possibility of ascertaining the several Intellectual and Moral Dispositions of Man and Animal, by the configuration of their Heads,  which was eventually published in 1819. 

It was Gall's chief supporter, Johann Spurzheim, who helped Gall develop many of his theories after they first met in 1800.   Although he wasn't the first to coin the term "phrenology", Spurzheim  quickly adopted it for the brain science that he and Gall developed.  Their relatively productive relationship end in 1813 over disagreements on how the brain should be classified.    While Gall's research on criminal brains led to his arguing that there were "evil" tendencies in those brains that needed to be suppressed (such as regions of the brain controlling "murder" and "theft"), Spurzheim rejected this completely and argued that criminal behaviour was caused by underdeveloped moral faculties.   He also changed Gall's classification system by adding new organs such as "hope" and "moral sense" to Gall's list.   The total number of organs in Spurzheim's revised list rose to thirty-three from Gall's original twenty-seven.    Spurzheim also rejected Gall's gloomy pessimism over changing human nature and argued that proper upbringing could help overcome criminal tendencies.     After their split, Gall publicly condemned many of Spurzheim's "innovations" in his own books and often denounced him as a plagiarist and a quack. 

And with good reason perhaps.  While Gall tried to link his conclusions to actual brain research, Spurzheim development of "practical phrenology" became extremely popular in England and Scotland (and eventually in the United States as well).   Gall was, well, galled by Spurzheim's success and, despite his refusal to use the term phrenology himself (he preferred to call his own science "organology" or "zoonomy"),  it was Spurzheim's term that won out.  Various critics had no problem linking their names together and one reviewer in 1815 denounced their theories as "a collection of mere absurdities, without truth, connexion, or consistency".   Despite some recognition for his original contributions to brain research, Gall remained bitter over never receiving the eminence he felt he deserved.  He died in 1828 after requesting that his own skull be added to the large collection of skulls that are still on display in the Rollet Museum in Baden bei Wien, Austria.

As fpr Spurzhim and his own chief supporter, George Combe, the practical phrenology that they both advocated had less and less to do with any actual brain science as time went on.   While Spurzheim still had some actual medical credentials and gave public demonstrations of brain dissections, his death in 1832 left George Combe as the chief spokesman for phrenology.  Since Combe had no actual medical training (he was a lawyer),  that also meant that phrenology's tenuous claim to science was weaker than ever.   Still, as phrenology shifted away from brain science towards more"personality-oriented" applications, social reformers, innovators, and criminologists became attracted by its appeal.  Cesare Lombroso incorporated many aspects of Gall and Spurzheim's ideas into his own system of identifying "born criminals".     Educators saw phrenology as a way of classifying students according to their ability to learn while psychiatrists began studying patient skulls to find better ways of dealing with asylum inmates. 

By the time of Johann Spurzheim's death, there were at least twenty-nine different phrenological societies in Great Britain alone (George Combe personally founded the Edinburgh Phrenological Society in 1820).  George Combe's books became international best-sellers and his best-known book, The Constitution of Man, sold more than seventy thousand copies by 1838 alone (and would eventually go on to sell more than three hundred thousand copies).   Even the British royal family consulted Conde since Prince Albert had been worried that one of his sons was a slow learner.   Conde also evaluated Queen Victoria (from a distance) and concluded that her broad and high forehead reflected her "firmness of purpose, great self-control, and awareness of moral principles".   

Despite the controvery over phrenology and increasingly successful attacks by eminent scientists,  phrenology spread across the Atlantic and American phrenological societies sprang up as well.  Still,  phrenology didn't last particularly long as a serious movement in the United States.   Eminent American surgeon John Collins Warren attended many of Spurzheim's lectures and recognized its significance aalthough he never became a member of a phrenological society himself.  He also carried out the autopsy on Johann Spurzheim after his death in Boston during an American tour (leading to Spurzheim's skull being added to the growing Harvard medical collection).    Other eminent medical researchers such as Charles Caldwell and John Bell also attended Spurzheim's lectures and founded Pennsylvania's first phrenological society (Caldwell went to write the first American textbook on phrenology).    Although George Combe visited the United States on lecture tours (and met several American presidents in the process), the movement began fading after 1840 and largely became relegated to a pseudoscience before the decade was out.

Which brings us back to Orson Fowler and his brother...

Continue to Part 2

 

 

 

The Nazi Patient

Adolf Hitler never had much luck with his doctors (not that being a hypochondriac helped).

And he certainly had his share of medical issues.  Along with lingering problems from his World War I injuries (including posttraumatic stress), he also suffered from uncontrollable flatulence. Ever since childhood, the Fuhrer experienced spasmodic stomach cramps, diarrhea, and constipation although medical historians seem divided on whether this was due to physical causes or lifelong stress. 
Whatever the reason, dining with Hitler was often an uncomfortable situation for his supporters due to the digestive attacks that happened after most meals.  Although no one dared comment whenever Hitler jumped up from the table and rushed to his room, his medical issues definitely grew worse over time.  While trying to cure himself by going over medical manuals (including embracing a vegetarian diet where possible), being a rabid hypochondriac left Adolf Hitler acutely self-conscious about his health.  Not only did he examine his stool with elaborate care, but he also experimented with various fad remedies.   Along with camomile enemas (don't ask), he also swore off meat completely after 1931 and only ate heaping plates of vegetables which were carefully prepared for him.  He also refused all cooked foods (which he considered to be cancer-inducing) and only ate a high-fibre diet.  For Adolf Hitler, a daily regimen often involved oatmeal with linseed oil, cauliflower, asparagus tips, and artichoke hearts .  This vegetarian fare did little to cure his digestive problems but der Fuhrer refused to consider anything else.  His mistrust of most medical doctors seemed to stem from the audacity of some of them to suggest that many of his problems were psychosomatic and that his self-diagnosis and treatment were at the root of his problems.

But his health issues only got worse after meeting Dr. Theodor Morell...

Born and raised in a small village in the upper Hesse,  Morell trained as a gynecologist and obstetrician and became a licensed physician in 1913.  Despite his thorough grounding in conventional medicine, he developed a reputation for favouring unconventional medical treatments in his Berlin medical practice.  Which he made various claims to an academic career, including studying under legendary bacteriologist, Elie Metchnikoff and teaching in different universities, the actual historical evidence for his acadamic career seems suspect.  Not that this stopped Morell from labelling himself as a professor at times, or owning shares in several pharmaceutical companies.   Theodor Morell's unlikely rise to prominence only began when he met Adolf Hitler during a party at the Berghof near Berchtesgarden in the Bavarian Alps.   It still isn't clear why Hitler decided to make Morell his personal physician. 

While historians have speculated that he may have treated Hitler for his recurring syphilis, the official story seems to be that Hitler was won over after Morell helped cure a painful case of eczema on his legs and provided temporary relief for his stomach cramps.   The other Nazi doctors had little respect for Morell (aside from his fondness for quack cures, he was also grossly obese with a body odour problem) but, from 1937 onward, Dr. Theodor Morell had complete control over the Fuhrer's medical care.   Although Hitler had another doctor previously, Dr. Karl Brandt, it was Theodor Morell whose medical opinion he relied on (infuriating Brandt and the other doctors).

And it was some care.  While Theodor Morell was probably not a complete quack, the medical treatment that he provided to Adolf Hitler seems bizarre, to put it mildly.   Morell was a firm believer in polypharmacy - treatment with multiple medications  (and the fact that the good doctor owned shares in many of the drug companies likely influenced his medication choices).    He also preferred to administer drugs by injection rather than oral doses.  To deal with the Fuhrer's stomach problems,  Morell chose not to send his star patient for a thorough gastronintestinal examination (despite Germany having some of the best internists in the world).  Instead, he prescribed a generous dose of "Dr. Koester's Anti-Gas Pills" for Hitler's stomach problems.   The Fuhrer took as many as sixteen of these pills a day, which was probably a bad idea since they contained dangerous levels of strychnine and atropine.   Even in small doses, both ingredients are deadly poisons and likely contributed to many of the adverse symptoms Hitler displayed during the last years of World War II (including glazed eyes, sallow skin, attention problems, and mood swings).  

Along with the pills though, Dr. Morell also began giving his patient daily injections of methamphetamine.   It is hard to say when Dr. Morrell first introduced Adolf Hitler to this new medication (or whose idea it was) but the daily injections apparently began by late 1941 or early 1942.  This was in addition to the other medications, including methamphetamine pills that Hitler took by mouth.  Hitler's arms eventually became riddled with injection marks and even Eva Braun grew to despise Morell and referred to him as "that injection quack" as she was talking to her mother.   She also dismissed his office as being a "pig sty" and refused to allow him to give her any more medical care.   By 1942 however, even Hitler's staunchest supporters were noticing that their leader was becoming increasingly bizarre with signs of distrust, irritability, loss of control, and poor decision-making - all signs of methamphetamine addiction.   These symptoms continued right up to the end of the war and Adolf Hitler's suicide on April 30, 1945.  

After their leader developed jaundice in 1944, three other doctors (including Karl Brandt) tried to have Morell fired but Hitler adamantly opposed them.  Whether this was through loyalty to Morell or his own amphetamine addiction is an open question.    Suspicious of the jaundice attack, Heinrich Himmler even went so far as to question Morell's assistant, Richard Weber, over whether the doctor was deliberately poisoning their leader, Weber replied that it was "out of the question.  Morell's too big of a coward for that".  While Hitler's mental deterioration during the last months of his life has been extensively written about and attributed to mental illness and the corrupting influence of absolute power, a more recent book has suggested that the treatment received from Dr. Morell may have played an important role in his downfall.  

As for Theodor Morell, his own downfall was rapid enough.  On April 22, 1945,  a week before his suicide, Adolf Hitler dismissed Morell from his Fuhrenbunker in Berlin and told him that he no longer needed medical care.   In poor health himself, Morell left a large supply of medicine in the bunker for Hitler's needs and managed to catch one of the last German flights out of the city.  He quickly fell into Allied hands however and spent the next two years in an internment camp on the site of the former Buchenwald concentration camp.   While the interrogators were repelled by Morell's lack of personal hygiene (his body odour was as bad as ever), they managed to collect complete details of the astonishing treatment that he provided Hitler.  In addition to the amphetamine injections, Hitler also took more than twenty-eight other kinds of medication including vitamins, testosterone, opiates, liver extracts, laxatives, and sedatives.  That also included some more innovative remedies including cocaine eyedrops (Hitler had ten of these a day), human placenta compounds, and "potency pills" made from ground bull's testicles.  According to Theodor Morell's diaries (now in the National Archives in Washington, D.C.), Hitler still suffered from daily flatulence despite the bizarre range of medications Morell offered.   If Morell hadn't been such an obvious Nazi toady, the Allies might well have pinned him with a medal for his role in Hitler's defeat.   As it was, he was released after two years of internment without ever being charged.   He died on March 26, 1948 of stroke-related problems.

It's easy to dismiss Dr. Theodor Morell as a total quack who was only propelled to the ranks of power because he was willing to provide his star patient with the medical care that more ethical doctors wouldn't.  Still, many of those same "ethical doctors" (including Karl Brandt) were later prosecuted for a range of war crimes involving human medical experimentation and other Nazi extermination policies.  Since there was no evidence that Morell was involved in the same way that other Nazi medical doctors were, he was never charged.  Presumably, Morell wasn't considered competent enough to participate in mass murder.

 If so, being a quack had its advantages

 

The Great New York Starvation Challenge

In the summer of 1881, New York City`s Clarendon Hall became the scene of a rather unusual public challenge.  An eccentric Minneapolis physician, Dr. Henry S. Tanner rented the hall to carry out a forty-two day fast.  Not only would Dr. Tanner`s fasting be monitored by New York`s most distinguished medical professionals but anyone outside the medical community would be able to watch for themselves (after paying the twenty-five cents admission fee).  According to Dr. Tanner, the point of his fast was to prove that human beings could go without food far longer than the twelve to fifteen-day limit laid down by the orthodox medical community.   By -passing that limit, Dr. Tanner hoped to prove that that the human mind possessed "untapped powers that modern medicine has yet to understand".  He also hoped to settle one of the great medical mysteries of the late 19^th century:  the mystery of the “fasting girls”.

By the end of the 19^th century, scientific authority had slowly edged out religion as a way of  answering fundamental questions about how the world worked.  Still, spiritualists and their supporters were fighting back vigorously.  Despite the tremendous rise in Victorian-age enthusiasm for scientific discovery and big engineering projects, there was a widespread fascination with spirit mediums, psychics and other fantastic claims of the paranormal.  Was it possible that scientists didn’t have all the answers after all?

Which brings us to “fasting girls” and the how they were able to survive without food...

Although the notion that religious ascetics could overcome the limits of their own bodies through brutal self-denial had been around since the Middle Ages, cases of young women living without food for extended periods of time first appeared in the medical literature only relatively recently.  By 1873,   Sir William Gull presented his now-classic paper “Anorexia Hysterica”  to describe what he insisted was a new medical disorder (which he later renamed anorexia nervosa) and the fasting girls phenomenon had already become front page news on both sides of the Atlantic.    Not long after Sarah Jacob, the “Welsh Fasting Girl”  drew headlines during the late 1860s, similar cases were found in the United States and Canada, including Mollie Fancher (a.k.a. “The Brooklyn Enigma”), Kate Smulsey (a.k.a. “The Fort Plains Fasting Girl”) and Josephine Marie Bedard, a French-Canadian girl living in Maine.   Mollie Fancher became a particular darling of the Spiritualist movement, as much for her supposed psychic powers as her miraculous ability to go without food.

All of which led to an interesting standoff. 

On one side, various scientific authorities insisted that the fasting girls were frauds.  Their defenders, including Spiritualists and family members, denied the accusations that the girls were secretly eating and insisted that the fasting was genuine.  Spiritualists in turn denounced the hardheaded skepticism of the medical doctors and one of them, Joseph Rodes Buchanan, even insisted that “Medical men and schools know no more of the psychic universe than a mole does of astronomy”.   After a controlled study of the most famous case, Sarah Jacob, led to her starvation death in a London hospital in 1869,  nobody felt inclined to try repeating the experiment for fear of more starvation deaths.  The vigorous debate reached its peak in 1881 and a public challenge from Dr. William Hammond of the New York Neurological Society for a formal proof of food abstinence. 

Bringing us back to Dr. Henry S.  Tanner and his public fast.  Although his initial plan was to go without food completely, he altered this slightly by taking “alcohol vapour baths” but otherwise stuck to his fast under the watchful eye of a panel of physicians (who also measured his urine and feces carefully).   Dr. Hammond and his neurologist colleague, Dr. George Beard, didn’t take part in the challenge despite invitations from Dr. Tanner and the media.   Over the course of the forty days that the fast lasted, Dr. Tanner was never caught cheating and insisted on continuing despite becoming extremely emaciated.   Despite expressing hope that his progressive starvation would lead to the sorts of religious visions and other “psychic experiences” that ascetics had reported in the past, Tanner was disappointed  in that.   He just got hungry and weak.

Once the forty day fast ended however, Dr. Tanner's claim to winning his challenge failed to impress his critics.  Neither Dr. Hammond or Dr. Beard considered the test to be valid despite Tanner losing more than forty pounds in his experiment.   As the two neurologists pointed out, the medical panel supervising the fast was made up of “a parcel of doctors whom very few had ever heard of” and that the “alcohol vapour baths” may have invalidated the results since they likely acted as a stimulant.   The New York Times was quick to side with the neurologists and labelled the entire event as “Tanner’s Folly” sinice the doctor had failed to win the challenge or to prove his claim.  The Times also added that "no physiological principle of any importance was deduced from the undertaking". 

Not surprisingly, Dr. Tanner was infuriated and insisted that his successful fast proved his claim about the ability of the mind to overcome the body.  He stated that his fasting demonstrated that humans could live in a state of suspended animation similar to bears going into hibernation.  While Tanner argued that his going without food for forty days proved that humans were capable of "hysterical lowered vitality" (entering a death-like state under extreme circumstances), hardly anyone was persuaded by his argument.  Though fasting girls continued to be studied, it was as examples of mental disorder rather than as being miraculous (despite prominent exceptions).

Although the 20th century would see a far more controlled study of human starvation that was much more useful in learning about the limits of the human body, "Tanner's Folly" earned Henry S. Tanner temporary status as a celebrity (despite his being largely forgotten today).  as well as a place in the writings of Mark Twain who, in his 1897 book, Following the Equator: A Journey Around the World, commented that ""I think that the Dr. Tanners and those others who go forty days without eating do it by resolutely keeping out the desire to eat, in the beginning, and that after a few hours the desire is discouraged and comes no more". 

Food for thought.

 

 

After Little Albert (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1

As for his two sons from his later marriage,  how they were raised often led to disagreements between him and Rosalie.  A 1930 article that she wrote in Parent's Magazine reflected the issues that she had with her husband's ideas about child-rearing.  Titled, "I Am The Mother of a Behaviorist's Sons",  the article  showed only lukewarm support for John Watson's stern behaviourist principles.  She even went so far as to suggest that her children be raised with an appreciation of art and music (which her husband often dismissed as frivolous).   Rosalie added that "In some respects I bow to the great wisdom in the science of behaviorism, and in others I am rebellious. ... I like being merry and gay and having the giggles.  The behaviorists think giggling is a sign of maladjustment."    Unfortunately, her positive influence on her sons would be brief.   After a bout with dysentery which grew worse despite treatment,  Rosalie Rayner Watson died at the age of 35 leaving John Watson to raise their children alone.   Devastated by Rosalie's death, he would never mention her name in his children's presence again.  As William and James Watson would later describe, his announcing to them that their mother had died was one of the few times that he had ever hugged them. 

Aside from advertising work (from which he eventually retired after a few years),  John Watson became a virtual recluse on his farm.   While he would be involved with other women, he never remarried and began to neglect his personal appearance and hygiene as he grew more eccentric.  In 1957, he was surprised when the American Psychological Association told him that he would be awarded a gold medal for his contributions to psychology.  Despite going with his sons to New York to receive the award,  he asked one of them to stand in for him at the last moment out of fear that he would burst into tears during the public ceremony.  The inscription on the medal read:

To John B. Watson whose work has been one of the vital determinants of the form and substance of modern psychology.  He initiated a revolution in psychological thought and his writings have been the point of departure for continuing lines of fruitful research.

Considering that John Watson's academic contributions had been overshadowed by later theorists and even his staunchest defenders had since rejected his extreme behaviourist position, it was a magnaminous tribute.  He died a year later at the age of eighty.   His older son William, who suffered from longstanding emotional problems despite becoming a successful Freudian psychoanalyst (which likely grieved his behaviourist father),  eventually commited suicide four years after his father's death.   Ironically,  William Watson's suicide may have led to a persistent urban legend surrounding  the supposed suicide of B.F. Skinner's younger daughter Deborah due to her spending part of her infancy in an Air Crib designed by her father  (Deborah Skinner Buzan has since devoted many years of her life debunking that particular rumour). 

As for his other son, James Watson did relatively better in life.  In a 1981 symposium at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association in Los Angeles, he would say that:

Both dad and mother, although she died when I was still a child, rigorously pursued the foundation teachings of behaviorism. Frankly, I think that a better end product would have resulted if the process of growing up had been [tempered] with some measure of affection -- it certainly would have made growing up less like a business proposition where one is judged by bottom-line performance.   It is my hope that the teachings of his disciples and others who have followed him have tempered the emotionally spartan upbringing that he espoused. His behavioristic theories on child development unquestionably have value in terms of life's preparation through the setting of standards and developing an understanding of the parameters of acceptable and responsible behavior, but they could have been much improved if one were permitted to mix in a big helping of parental affection. I believe to do so would provide a better psychological foundation for all of us who, at one time or another in life, are ultimately put to the test of weathering the emotional storms that often topple people because of the frail egos and low levels of self-esteem, which usually result from a childhood diet that lacks a deeper sense of human connection.

Although James Watson would later backtrack on his criticism of his father's ideas, other members of John's family would be less generous.  The most well-known of John Watson's descendants is his granddaughter, actress Mariette Hartley (of whom I happen to be a long-time fan).    In her 1990 book, Breaking the Silence, she described her own emotional problems growing up with her mother, John Watson's daughter Polly.   While Ms. Hartley eventually survived her mother's alcoholism and suicide attempts as well as many of the other tragedies that nearly overwhelmed her, the consequences of John Watson's theories definitely had an influence.  As Ms. Hartley would state in her book: 

Grandfather's theories infected my mother's life, my life, and the lives of millions. How do you break a legacy? How do you keep from passing a debilitating inheritance down, generation to generation, like a genetic flaw?

While John Watson died believing to the end that the psychological revolution that he had helped bring about would change psychology forever, he was largely mistaken.   Even in his lifetime, neobehaviourists such as Clark Hull and B.F. Skinner would demonstrate that the radical behaviourism endorsed by Watson was far too simplistic to explain something as complex as behaviour (whether in humans or animals).   As new models of cognitive, motivational, and biological psychology came along, Watson's old theories seemed increasingly out of step with the more diversified view of psychology favoured today.  

Despite his extreme behaviourism falling out of favour, John Broadus Watson is still considered to be one of the central figures in psychology's history.   From the "Little Albert" experiment to his highly controversial theories on raising children, he may well be remembered more as a showman for his own special brand of psychology than as a scientist.  Whatever his impact, both personal and professional,  he remains larger than life.

And that may well be the legacy he would have wanted most.

 

 

Giant's Shoulders #46

 Welcome to the latest edition of the Giant's Shoulders, the monthly blog carnival devoted to the history of science.    With that mind, let's turn to the numerous and diverse contributions that have been made to this latest edition.  Classified according to the different sciences they represent, we have:

Anatomy and Medicine

A big hat tip to Thony Christie who contributed numerous suggested posts for addition to this carnival.  One of these posts is from the EvoAnth blog and shows the first evidence of prosthetic attachments in Ancient Egypt.  I'll bet you didn't know that the first bionic woman lived 3,000 years ago!  Me, neither.

How frequent were premature burials in the 18th and 19th centuries?  Not only did fear lead to a brisk business in "safety coffins" but this  painful post from the Chirugeon's Apprentice blog shows the extreme measures used by surgeons dealing with corpses to ensure that not-quite-dead patients wouldn't be accidentally dissected. 

Astronomy

Being an amateur astronomer can be a frustrating business.  But how frustrating would it be to prepare for years for a once-in-a-lifetime event and then end up missing it?  Thony Christie gives us a sympathetic look at David Rittenhouse and his years of preparation to witness the 1769 Transit of Venus -  only to faint due to poor health just as the cardinal moment arrived. Ouch. 

That same fateful Transit of Venus generated enough public interest to inspire lecturer and instrument maker, Benjamin Martin, to create a special demonstration model in his London shop.  Curious visitors could come into the shop to see the clockwork model.  Multimedia in the 18th century!  The Transit of Venus site has the details. 

What is the Antikythera Mechanism?  Was it the first true mechanical calculator?  Ian Hopkinson provides us with a review of Jo Marchant's book on the Antikythera Mechanism along with videos of the mechanism and how it originally operated. 

The race  to measure longitude accurately seems important enough for navigation, but how much more important did it become in time of war?  This fascinating post by the Board of Longitude Project at Greenwich's Royal Observatory helps recapture some of the drama of the 18th century longitude competition and how it quickly became a question of national security. 

Considering how important the longitude race became, it's hardly surprising that the British government offered a hefty prize to anyone who developed a reliable method for measurement (which is why the Board of Longitude was first formed in 1714).  Ian Hopkinson discusses the battle between the Board and John Harrison to claim that prize as well as all the other prizes that the Board handed out.

Back in the 18th century, telescopes were often considered luxury items despite their importance in astronomy and navigation.  Talented craftsman often made telescopes that were designed to be works of art as well as being functional.   This news item from Live Science shares the recent discovery of five telescopes recently discovered in Amsterdam with casings hand-carved from bone.

For many European countries, astronomical observatories often became a source of national pride.  A post by Rebekah Higgitt on the Teleskopos blog provides us with a book review on a recently-published 200-year history of the Tartu Observatory in Estonia (formerly the pride of the Russian Empire).

Did anyone in Columbus' time actually believe that the Earth was flat?  They actually didn't although this curious myth has a strange habit of persisting.  Even President Obama made that same mistake in a recent statement (and you'd think he would have known better).   Darin Hayton of the Philadelphia Area Center for the History of Science weighs in with two posts.  The first titled "Why the Flat Earth Myth Bugs Me" (and he isn't the only one) on how the myth started and why people keep repeating it.  In a second post titled "Columbus' Voyage Was a Religious Journey", he explores Christopher Columbus' apocalyptic fears and why they led him to make his fateful voyages.

Physics

The editors of Annalen der Phyik have launched a new section:  "Then and Now" dedicated to the history of physics and the need for scientists to understand what went before.  The editorial announcing the launch leads off with one of physicist Moritz Schlitz's most memorable sayings: "Anyone ignorant in physics is certainly a child in thought – but so too is anyone who does not know history."

Geology

Long before Darwin revolutionalized science with his theory of evolution, geologists faced the troublesome question of what fossils were and where they came from.   The 18th century was filled with "giants" who weren't afraid to overturn orthodox thinking about how life began (and these giants had very broad shoulders in case you forgot the name of this carnival).   Mike Rendell of the Georgian Gentleman blog tells us about one of these giants, James Hutton, the "Father of Modern Geology".    While never receiving the recognition he deserved, James Hutton was one of the typical Renaissance men of his time who, among many other achievements, came up with one of the first modern theories of evolution. 

The History of Geology blog also weighs in with the story of 18th-century surveyor and geologist, William Smith,  his early life in England, and the curious fossils in a local quarry that changed his life.

Nature and Evolution

Here's a question you probably never asked yourself.  While historians have written extensively about the way the Church of England reacted to Charles Darwin's heretical new take on evolution, how did other religions react?   The entertaining Michael Kay provides us with a look at how some of the most prominent Jewish rabbis of the 19th century responded to Darwin and his world-shaking new theory in this fascinating post on his Thinking Through My Fingers blog. 

Speaking of Darwin, one of his caricatures is missing!  Anyone with information leading to its recovery should contact the Darwin Correspondence Project immediately.

Can the discovery of new fossil evidence suggesting that the early model of a unique migration wave out from Africa may have been too simple lead to a vindication of George Dawson and his Piltdown Man (not to mention the reported sightings of mysterious human-like creatures around the world)?  Er, probably not.  Did I mention that this post by David Bressan at the History of Geology blog is dated April 1?

Again on the subject of Darwin, Athene Donald shows the odd relationship between Charles Darwin's grandfather Erasmus and equally eminent man-of-letters, Samuel Johnson.  How did the two of them get along?  Not very well, as it happens. 

For many historians of science, one of the most thrilling aspects of searching through centuries-old books on natural philosophy is to sample the amazing handmade illustrations of plants and animals.  The Origins of Science as a Visual Pursuit blog provides us with a beautiful post on Dr. Florike Egmond's story on the rediscovery of the original drawings for Conrad Gesser's Historia animalium. 

Speaking of beautiful illustrations, Harvard's Houghton Library is announcing the opening of a new exhibition of natural history illustrations by the whimsical Edward Lear.   Along with his legacy of literary works of nonsense poetry and amazing paintings, Lear also made hundreds of natural history sketches, many of which are on display for the first time at the library.

John Steinbeck, writer, novelist, scientist?   A new Guardian post on Steinbeck's 1951 book, The Log From The Sea of Cortez about the six weeks he spent in the Gulf of California assisting in a marine biology project shows that his skill as a writer helped make the expedition experience come alive.  

Interested in insects?  BiblioOdyssey shows an amazing selection from the Historic Entomology Online site at Wageningen UR. 

Also from the Board of Longitude Project site, there is a post showing some the amazing specimens that British explorers brought back from the Arctic (complete with latitude and longitude of where they were collected, of course).  Many of those specimens became part of the British Museum's collection as well as being sent to herbariums throughout the U.K. 

Speaking of herbariums and Arctic explorers,  another post by Rebekah Higgitt of the Teleskopos blog provides a look at the Herbarium of the Royal Botanic garden in Edinburgh.  Many of the specimens that are now part of the permanent collection there were originally gathered in the 19th century by Arctic explorers such as William Parry.  Parry and his crew were awarded £5000 for reaching 110⁰ West within the Arctic Circle with help from the Board of Longitude who advised them on instruments and techniques. 

Mathematics

While women scientists being left out of the history of science seems all too familiar, Emilie du Chatelet deserves better than simply being known as the love of Voltaire's life.  This contribution from the Daily Maverick provides a tantalizing look at one of the greatest female intellectuals, mathematicians and thinkers in history. 

Psychology and Anthropology

The eminent Dr. SkySkull  weighs in with his own  take on the John Derbyshire racism fiasco and an indepth examination of 19th century research in race and intelligence.  A good look at what has and hasn't changed in 176 years on his Skulls in the Stars blog. 

Technology

Mike Rendell of the Georgian Gentleman blog also shares a new post on Thomas Newcomen and his first working steam engine at a coalmine near Dudley Castle in Staffordshire in 1712.   Not only did this help launch the Industrial Revolution but it was recently commemorated as part of a series of stamps released by the Royal Mail under the heading of “Britons of Distinction”.

Over at The Atlantic, there is a collection of delightfully weird sketches by famed inventor, Alexander Graham Bell.  All of the sketches were taken from his numerous laboratory notebooks although his handwriting is hard to follow at times. 

For my own modest contribution, I am including this post titled "That X-Ray Vision".  How Wilhelm Roentgen, Thomas Edison and Superman joined forces to change the world (and sell shoes as well).

Miscellaneous

Not sure how else to classify this one but how could I not include this post on the British Library's recent discovery of a medieval cookbook containing recipes on the proper cooking of blackbirds, hedgehogs, and unicorns?  Beginning with the phrase "taketh one unicorne", the unicorn recipe involves marinading the beast in cloves and garlic before being roasted on a griddle.  Good to know.

***************************************************************

With that, we close this edition of the Giant's Shoulders.   The next edition will be hosted by blog carnival newcomer  Medical Heritage Library  (closing date for submissions is  May 15).  If anyone would like to host a future edition, please contact either either Dr SkySkull at Skulls in the Stars or Thony C at The Renaissance Mathematicus.    Remember the future of the History of Science blog carnival rests on your shoulders.

 

 

 

 

 

 

After Little Albert (Part 1)

For all the controversy surrounding John Broadus Watson and his famous Little Albert study,  it was what was happening behind the scenes at the time that ultimately cost him his position at John Hopkins University.   During the winter of 1919-1920, all of the work that he did with eleven-month Little Albert was conducted with the help of his bright young graduate student, Rosalie Rayner.   Their collaboration continued for months and he spent more and more time away from home and in his assistant's company.  Whatever suspicions that Watson's wife had of what was happening between her husband and Rayner seemed confirmed when she found a passionate note in his coat pocket.  The note was from Rosalie Rayner to her husband and Mary Watson had good cause to question her husband's fidelity (he had strayed before, after all).

Knowing that she needed more evidence, Mary took advantage of a dinner invitation at the home of Rosalie's parents to investigate further.  After pretending that she had a headache and needed to lie down for a while, she sneaked into Rosalie's bedroom and found love letters that John Watson had written to Rosalie.  The letters were  graphic enough to give her all the proof that she needed.   Mary Watson confronted her husband and threatening to ruin his career if he didn't end his relationship with Rosalie immediately.  When he refused, she decided on a very public divorce.

Not only did the divorce proceedings become front-page news in Baltimore, but copies of the love letters were sent to the president of the university, Frank Goodnow (whether the letters were sent by Mary herself or her brother isn't known).   Even today, an affair between a faculty member and a graduate student is considered improper but back then it was unforgivable.  Goodnow demanded that Watson resign his position and John Watson, up to then a rising light in psychology, would never work as an academic again.   Once his divorce from Mary was finalized, John and Rosalie were married in 1921 and they would eventually have two sons together. 

Although his academic career was over, John Broadus Watson was still very much a psychologist and the behaviourist school that he had spearheaded was just beginning to gain force.  Bitter over the lack of support from the university and his fellow psychologists, John and Rosalie moved to New York City where he used the contacts developed by fellow psychologist E.B. Titchener to become resident psychologist for the J. Walter Thompson advertising agency.   Still one of the largest advertising agencies in the United States,  the Thompson Agency (now known as JWT) provided Watson with an opportunity to merge psychology and advertising to create new and innovative new campaigns to sell a wide variety of products.  During his time with the agency, Watson developed some of the most successful campaigns in the agency's history including ads for Pond's Cold Creams (he obtained testimonials from the Queens of Spain and Romania praising the product), Johnson and Johnson baby powder, and Maxwell House instant coffee.   Watson is now considered to be one of the pioneers of modern advertising and continued to draw an enormous salary even at the height of the Depression.  He and Rosalie settled down on a large hobby farm in Connecticut and he devoted his time puttering on the farm when he wasn't working in New York.

Along with his extremely lucrative advertising work, John Watson also became an author of popular books and magazine articles on psychology.  Most of his books and articles focused on behaviourism, particularly in using behavioural principles to raise children.  Using the slogan of "not more babies but better brought up babies",   he also became famous (or infamous depending on your perspective) for his outspoke support of nurture over nature in child-rearing.   In his classic book, Behaviorism, he provided his famous "Twelve Infants" quotation:

Give me a dozen healthy infants, well-formed, and my own specified world to bring them up in and I'll guarantee to take any one at random and train him to become any type of specialist I might select – doctor, lawyer, artist, merchant-chief and, yes, even beggar-man and thief, regardless of his talents, penchants, tendencies, abilities, vocations, and race of his ancestors. I am going beyond my facts and I admit it, but so have the advocates of the contrary and they have been doing it for many thousands of years.

The last sentence is often omitted from the quote giving Watson a more radical reputation as a behaviourist than he likely deserves.   Still, his theories about child development must have seemed radical enough at the time.  Though politically conservative, he considered behaviourism to be the ideal way to mold a child's personality and to counteract the dominant hereditarian views of the time (racial theories inspired by Francis Galton and other eugenics writers were still very much in favour).  In his 1928 book, Psychological Care of Infant and Child (co-written with Rosalie Rayner),  Watson insisted that children be treated as young adults and that mothers refrain from providing too much love and affection to their children.   Since society as a whole didn't provide adults with unconditional love and support, parents needed to prepare children for their place in society by not giving them unrealistic expectations.  He also advised against letting children sit on their parents' lap or otherwise encouraging emotional dependence.   The book became extremely popular and American parents regarded it as the de facto reference manual for child-rearing for decades afterward.

By all accounts, he was a stern and unemotional father who had no difficulty putting his own behaviourist theories of upbringing into practice.  His two children by his first wife included a daughter, Polly and a son, John, who were both plagued with lifelong emotional and medical issues.    Whether that was due to Watson's unemotional parenting or the scandalous breakup of his marriage to Mary seems open to question.  

Continue to Part 2.

 

The Devil in the Convent

Beginning in 1632, rumours spread throughout the town of Loudon, France about a strange outbreak occurring in the local Ursuline convent.   All of the nuns, including the Mother Superior began experiencing strange convulsions and "using abusive language" (although the lurid details kept changing as the rumours spread).   Although the nuns and their priest had attempted to hide what was happening for as long as possible,  tales of the demonic possession occurring in the convent eventually led to a formal investigation.

The convent, which had only been founded a few years earlier, already had a reputation for pious living and also functioned as a boarding school for the daughters of well-off families. Almost all of the seventeen nuns in the convent, including the Mother Superior Jeanne des Anges, belonged to minor noble families although the sisters had a difficult time making ends meet. The convent had no income aside from tuition fees and their only significant property was the convent house itself. Due to the reforms imposed by the Council of Trent some decades previously, convent life was strictly controlled by the Church with no males allowed inside the convent walls except for the Father Confessor.    On recently being appointed to that post, the new Confessor Canon Mignon was certainly alarmed by what the nuns began telling him about strange nightly visitations by demons, apparently intent on seducing them. Beginning with the Mother Superior herself and eventually spreading to all of the other nuns in the convent, signs of demonic possession, including sexual moaning, convulsions, speaking in tongues (glossolalia), and visions quickly spiralled out of control.  Canon Mignon consulted various medical doctors and eventually arranged for exorcisms to try controlling what was happening.   He and his fellow priests became increasingly alarmed when the nuns reacted to the exorcisms by screaming and making lewd sexual advances towards the priests.   Even more outrageous was the Mother Superior accusing a local priest, Urbain Grandier, of being responsible for what was happening.    The nuns, led by Jeanne des Anges, insisted that the possessions were due to two devils named Asmodeus and Zabulon and that Grandier had sent them to the convent after throwing roses over the convent wall.

Grandier was, by all accounts, a most unusual priest. Handsome and well-connected, he had already gained a scandalous reputation, not only for being politically outspoken but also for the less-than discreet affairs that he had with numerous women in the town (including fathering several children). Despite numerous complaints by outraged husbands and fathers, Grandier was protected by the local Huguenot community who admired his outspokenness and his bold attacks on the Church and its special privileges. When his bishop had Grandier arrested in 1630, he was formally banned from serving as a priest in Loudun at which point his family and friends went to work on his behalf. Using bribery and intimidation of the witnesses against Grandier, they managed to have him reinstated in 1631. All that the ecclesiastic panel was able to do was to issue a mild warning for Grandier to “behave well and decently according to the Holy Decretals and Canonical Constitutions”.  Although the bishop warned Grandier to leave Loudun, he ignored the advice and regarded his acquittal as a total victory. He even went so far as to harass all of the townspeople who had testified against him including demanding legal restitution in court.   While friends tried to talk him out of this campaign, he ignored them all. It would be a costly mistake.

Ironically, Urbain Grandier had offered his name for the post of Father Confessor for the Ursuline convent in town despite his sinister reputation. The job went to Canon Mignon instead and sparked an uncomfortable rivalry between the two priests, especially since Mignon had been involved in his previous trial.  As for the nuns, many of whom had supported Grandier becoming the Father Confessor for the convent, exactly what was causing the strange stories of nightly visitations and demonic seductions is still open to question. Whether Urbain Grandier was actually sneaking into the convent somehow or whether the strange epidemic was entirely due to mass hysteria on the part of the nuns, the rumours of what was happening in the convent spread beyond the town. Not only did parents withdraw all of the convent’s students one by one, but the convent's nuns were left completely destitute when their own families withdrew all support.   

Urbain Grandier knew full well the danger that he was in and he arranged with the Archbishop of  Bourdeaux to have his personal doctor examine the nuns.  When no medical evidence for the possessions was found, the Archbishop ordered the exorcisms to end and arranged for the nuns to be imprisoned n their cells.  Canon Mignon and his assistant then went over the Archbishop's head and asked King Louis XIII's chief minister Cardinal Richelieu to order an investigation.   Since Richelieu was a frequent target of Grandier's political diatribes, he likely saw this as an excellent opportunity to rid himself of the renegade priest once and for all.    That one of Richelieu's own relatives was one of the Loudun nuns likely didn't help matters either.  The Cardinal sent a team of investigators to Loudun and authorized them to do whatever was necessary to end the possessions (including threatening to tear down the convent and the surrounding town).

During a public exorcism conducted before more than seven  thousand people, the chief exorcist, Father Jean-Joseph Surin invited the demons possessing the nuns to inhabit his own body, the demons reportedly complied and he "lost mental balance as a result".  Father Surin inflicted various injuries on himself and then attempted suicide.   After being restrained and regaining his sanity,the exorcist said that he was "unable to understand what happened to him" when the unknown spirit entered his body.   As the exorcisms continued, the accusations against Grandier became even more lurid and the nuns claimed that they were possessed by a multitude of demons.    When Grandier attempted an exorcism himself to clear his name,  the supposedly possessed nuns answered his threats by making him seem more guilty than ever (their testimony had likely been coached by Richelieu's investigators).     After a formal document surfaced, allegedly showing the pact between Grandier and Satan and written in blood,  Grandier's fate was likely sealed.   

Urbain Grandier was imprisoned at the Castle of Angier in December, 1633.   Despite protests by his supporters, he was stripped, shaved, and his body searched for "devil's marks".  When he refused to confess to sorcery, he was repeatedly tortured according to the practices laid out n the Malleus Maleficarum.    Anyone courageous enough to speak out on Grandier's behalf (including some of the nuns) were threatened by the Church and the Crown.   Eventually, the presiding inquisitor announced that anyone who testified in favour of Grandier would be declared traitors to France and have their property seized.   With all supporters silenced, the outcome of Urbain Grandier's trial was a foregone conclusion.  He was found guilty of magic, maleficia, and of "causing demoniacal possession of several Ursuline nuns of this town of Loudun, as well as of other secular women, together with other charges and crimes resulting therefrom".   Grandier's steadfast refusal to confess his crime despite being his torture and the severity of his punishment hardly moved his persecutors.  As one of the monks charged with trying to convert him prior to his execution later said, "I am not astonished at his impenitence, nor at his refusal to admit himself guilty of magic, both under torture and at his execution, for it is known that magicians promise the devil never to confess the crime, and he in turn hardens their heart". 

Despite promises that he would be allowed to make a public statement and that he would be humanely garroted beforehand, Urbain Grandier was burned alive at the stake on August 18, 1634.  According to one story, Grandier promised that one of the attending priests, Father Lactance, would died within thirty days and that many of his other persecutors would die as well.  While Father Lactance died on schedule (reportedly crying that he was not responsible for Grandier's death),  the legends surrounding Urbain Grandier and the Loudun possessions hardly ended there.   Many of the participants who were involved in  Grandier's execution died within a few years of his execution, whether due to remorse or a dying magician's curse seems to depend on which account of the time you happen to read.

And the Loudun possessions didn't end with Grandier's death either.  Mother Superior Jeanne des Anges (who seemed to have some exaggerated views of her own  piety) insisted that the exorcisms continue since she and her nuns were still being possessed by devils.   Public exorcisms of the nuns continued until 1637  when Richelieu himself ordered them stopped and the investigation ended.  Hardly anyone else in positions of power really believed that Grandier had been guilty but the story of the Loudun possessions and Grandier's fate made for a graphic lesson of what happened to anyone who crossed Cardinal Richelieu.   That the public exorcisms helped convince many local Protestants to convert to Catholicism seemed to be an extra benefit.   As for the "contract" with Satan supposedly signed by Grandier, many modern historians are divided over whether Grandier's signature had been completely forged or whether Grandier had signed it himself during one of his torture sessions.

Whether the Loudun possessions began with mass hysteria or as an entirely staged power play on Cardinal Richelieu's part, the case has been examined in depth by numerous authors including Alexander Dumas (pere) and Jules Michelet.  Aldous Huxley's full-length book, The Devils of Loudun was published in 1952 and inspired a successful stage play as well as  a classic horror film by Ken Russell.    The continuing fascination with Urbain Grandier's case may well be due to the role that religious persecution and cynical political manipulation played in his torture and gruesome death.  That accused sorcerers are being killed today over evidence just as flimsy as what condemned Grandier centuries ago suggests that the lessons of his case have still not been completely learned.

 

 

That X-ray Vision

When Wilhelm Roentgen presented his now-classic paper "On a New Kind of Rays" to the Wurzburg Physico-Medical Society in 1895,  few people outside the scientific community appreciated the medical revolution that his discovery would soon launch.   Although Roentgen would be showered with honours for his work on x-rays (including the first-ever Nobel prize in Physics in 1901), Thomas Edison was the one who first demonstrated the widescale benefits of x-ray technology.   In time, he and his staff would also demonstrate its dangers as well.

Always open to finding new ways to make life better (and to make a profit), Edison began work on a more practical method of harnessing x-rays immediately after Roentgen's initial announcement.   While the elaborate Crookes tube system that Roentgen used made for impressive laboratory demonstrations,  hospitals and medical clinics would need something more compact and energy-efficient.    Much like Marie Curie and her discovery of Radium, Roentgen refused to patent his discovery and placed it in the public domain since he wanted humanity "to benefit from practical applications of the same".    That meant that Edison was free to experiment with x-rays and to develop the first working fluroscope using tungstate of calcium as opposed to Roentgen's barium platinocyanide apparatus.  By 1896,  Thomas Edison announced that the Edison X-ray tube was ready for market.

With his usual showmanship, Thomas Edison conducted a public exhibition of his new invention at the 1896 Electrical Exhibition in New York's Grand Central Palace.   In a classic case of Murphy's law in action, Edison and his assistants personally installed the equipment for the initial showing only to find that some of the big inductance coils had been damaged in shipping.   To have the fluoroscope ready in time for the grand opening on Monday,  Edison and his staff worked all weekend to repair the equipment.    As one assistant would admit later, "We worked continuously all through that Saturday night and all day Sunday until evening, when we finished the job. I don't remember ever being conscious of more muscles in my life. I guess Edison was tired also, but he took it very philosophically."

Despite the last-minute problems, the first public demonstration of the new Edison fluoroscope to the American people was an overwhelming success.  Thousands of spectators lined up for a chance to see their own bones and one ecstatic patient even arranged for a medical x-ray on the operating table the day of Edison's exhibition.   When one attendant dared to complain publicly that the fluoroscent screen was just a sheet of ground glass, Edison responded by hauling him on stage where he was forced to place his wrist in the fluoroscope to see his bones for himself.   Edison's demonstration received enthusiastic media reviews including an article in the May 1896 issue of Century Magazine. 

That same article also demonstrated a darker side to Edison's new technology, however.   One of his assistants, glassmaker Clarence Madison Dally, suffered adverse effects from radiation exposure.   As Edison noted in the article:

When the X-ray came up, I made the first fluoroscope, using tungstate of calcium. I also found that this tungstate could be put into a vacuum chamber of glass and fused to the inner walls of the chamber; and if the X-ray electrodes were let into the glass chamber and a proper vacuum was attained, you could get a fluorescent lamp of several candle-power. I started in to make a number of these lamps, but I soon found that the X-ray had affected poisonously my assistant, Mr. Dally, so that his hair came out and his flesh commenced to ulcerate. I then concluded it would not do, and that it would not be a very popular kind of light; so I dropped it

Unfortunately for Clarence Dally, the consequences of his radiation exposure didn't improve with time.  By 1900, the radiation damage to his hands and face was bad enough for him to request more time off from work.   The strange burns to his left hand also failed to heal properly.  Since there were no previous cases of radiation exposure on record, the medical treatment that he received was largely experimental.   Edison kept Dally on the payroll since the long hours spent working on the new fluroscope appeared directly responsible for his health problems.  Despite radical skin grafts and the amputation of his left hand in 1902 to halt carcinoma, Dally's condition worsened.  His death from mediastinal carcinoma in 1904 gave him the dubious honour of being the first American to die of radiation poisoning. 

Shaken by Clarence Dally's death, Thomas Edison stopped all work on his fluoroscope.   While other workers suffered from radiation effects (including Edison himself whose vision was affected),  Dally was the only fatality.   As Edison would later announce:

"Don't talk to me about X-rays," he said. "I am afraid of them. I stopped experimenting with them two years ago, when I came near to losing my eyesight and Dally, my assistant practically lost the use of both of his arms. I am afraid of radium and polonium too, and I don't want to monkey with them."

Despite Edison's public warnings about the dangers of indiscriminate x-ray use,  the fluoroscope's value in medicine and industry quickly overcame any misgivings.   The Radiological Society of North America (RSNA) was founded in 1915 to provide proper safeguards and prevent further tragedies.  Still, that didn't stop more enterprising companies from searching for  new ways to profit from fluroscope technology. 

While Boston doctor Jacob Lowe first patented his fluoroscope for x-raying feet in 1919 for diagnosing patients' foot injuries, x-ray shoe-fitting machines quickly became a standard feature in many shoe stores on both sides of the Atlantic.   The RSNA quickly protested the use of x-rays in shoe stores arguing that it "lowers the profession of radiology" but the "Foot-O-Scope" (patented as the Pedoscope in the U.K.) became enormously popular.  The two largest manufacturers of shoe-fitting fluroscopes, the X-Ray Shoe Fitter Corporation of Milwaukee, Wisconsin and the Pedoscope Company in Great Britain sold thousands of units across the U.S., Canada and the U.K.  

Just about every prominent shoe store had a unit and customers were often invited to use the viewfinder to watch their toes wiggle while the fluorscope was operating.  Length of x-ray exposure varied according to a timer on the machine (typically twenty seconds but the timer allowed up to forty-five seconds).    The x-ray intensity ranged according to the size of the foot and the only protection that customers and staff received was a thin aluminum filter.   Not only were there no warnings about possible health issues relating to x-ray exposure but the devices were often marketed to parents as a way of ensuring proper foot care for their children (one advertising slogan was "They'll need their feet all through life").    The X-Ray Shoe Fitter Corporation had an aggressive advertising campaign stressing the ease and safety of their machines, including a Seal of Commendation from Parents' Magazine to highlight the benefits of x-ray technology in foot care.   X-rays became downright glamourous during that early era so it was probably not surprising that Superman's creators endowed him with "X-ray vision" (along with every other power they could imagine). 

More than twenty years would pass before medical researchers began taking a closer look at the potential hazards of shoe-fitting fluoroscopes.  By the end of World War II and the beginning of the Atomic Age,  cases of radiation exposure seen in survivors from Hiroshima and Nagasaki were reported in the medical literature and new concerns were raised about indiscriminate use of x-rays in non-medical settings.  In one widely-cited 1950 article, researchers Leon Lewis and Paul E. Caplan concluded that "the shoe-fitting fluroscope is not an instrument with obvious hazardous potentialities.  It has long been used and no direct clinical evidence of harm has yet been established" and x-ray machines continued to be a common sight in shoe stores.  Still,  with growing anecdotal evidence of shoe-store assistants developing skin problems from overexposure to x-rays, U.S. agencies began imposing stricter guidelines concerning safe exposure levels.  Companies selling fluroscopes took the new regulations in stride and even boasted about their compliance in advertisements which suggested (incorrectly) that their machines were government approved.   

While no obvious cases like Clarence Dally ever emerged over misuse of shoe-fitting fluroscopes (despite some incidents of basal cell foot carcinoma linked to x-ray use),  the backlash had definitely set in by the 1960s.  More than thirty-three states had banned the device by 1970 and other states insisted that only a qualified physician could operate x-ray machines for shoe-fitting.   Having medical doctors run machines that had been previously seen as harmless was enough to discourage most parents from allowing their use on their children (or themselves).    Companies selling the machines fought back vigorously, both in the U.S. and the U.K. with advertising campaigns intended to overcome suspected health risks but the tide had definitely turned.   By the end of the 1970s, shoe-fitting fluoroscopes were gone from virtually every store (one was reported in Virginia as late as 1981).  

As medical fads go, the x-ray craze was relatively benign despite more than a century passing since Wilhelm Roentgen's initial discovery (not counting Clarence Dally's tragic death).  Although fluoroscopes are used by radiologists, in dental offices, and in industrial settings, modern safeguards help prevent health problems despite ongoing controversy over safe exposure levels.   More unconventional x-ray applications such as the shoe-fitting fluoroscope have long since been phased out.  Still, full-body x-ray scanners remain a common feature in airports and security checkpoints arond the world despite limited research on safe exposure levels.   Whether the rationale for their use will prove to be as  mythical as the "benefits" of the shoe-fitting fluoroscope will be for future generations to discover.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Returning from Heaven (Part 2)

Continued from Part 1

Eventually Jemima's following grew large enough for her to found a permanent colony along the western side of Lake Seneca in what is now the state of New York.  Placing her "New Jerusalem" in what is now the town of Penn Yan in New York,  the settlement Jemima Wilkinson established became a thriving religious community of more than two hundred residents (easily the largest settlement in western New York during the 1790s).    Expanding rapidly, Jemima's followers founded other towns nearby despite dissension over the issue of leadership.  While  Jemima was the unquestioned spiritual head of the group, she left all secular decisions up to her more prominent followers.  There was also the question of who would own the land (which had been purchased directly by her more prosperous supporters, many of whom were chafing under Jemima's strict leadership).    A permanent home was finally established for Jemima Wilkinson (under the name "Universal Friend") in the newly-formed Jerusalem township and she lived there for the rest of her life. 

Not that Jemima had an easy life.  Despite her advancing years, she insisted on working the fields, cutting firewood, or any other task that she and her followers needed to maintain themselves.   In addition to her heavy workload, she interacted with the neighbouring native American tribes and earned their respect by not proselytizing (setting her apart from many of the other local missionaries).    Unfortunately, there was also the community policy of celibacy to deal with.  Much like Ann Lee and her Shakers, survival depended on recruiting fresh converts.  At the same time, as more followers left the community, Jemima found herself besieged by lawsuits, including a charge of "Christian blasphemy" in 1800.  The blasphemy charge was thrown out by the judge (who invoked the newly established U.S. Constitution and its principle of separation of church and state) but the lawsuits kept on coming.

For the last five years of her life, Jemima Wilkinson seemed acutely aware that time was running out and often used the phrase "In Time" to describe the imminent return of Christ.  Her followers built a three-story mansion where she and the Universal Friend could live.  The house included a long winding staircase where she preached to the followers gathering on the floor underneath.  More than seventeen of her followers lived in the house, all celibate women (the celibate men lived in separate log cabins).    On July 1, 1819, Jemima Wilkinson "left Time" (as her followers later described her death).   She was sixty-one years old and the exact cause of death was not recorded.  The body was quietly buried in a spot known only to two of her followers  (the secret of her final resting-place was reportedly passed on to their descendants).  Due to continuing litigation after Jemima's death, most of the common assets eventually passed out of the community as dissident followers demanded a share.    Even Jemima's majestic mansion (which is still standing) was sold off in 1840.  The last of her followers died in 1874 but all income from the remaining community assets had stopped long before that.    Jemima Wilkinson's portrait, Bible, and many of her papers are still on display at the Oliver House Museum in Penn Yan.

While many of the descendants of Jemima Wilkinson's followers still live in what is now Yates Country in New York's Finger Lakes region, there are almost no other signs left of what was certainly one of the most remarkable religious movements in the United States during the early 19th century.   She was never as famous as Ann Lee, but both Lee and Jemima Wilkinson represented a radical alternative to the patriarchal religious figures who dominated the other religious movements of the time.    There is a certain irony given that their brand of evangelism involved a policy of total abstinence from sex and, in Jemima Wilkinson's case, a renouncing of gender itself.   Although she was a champion of women's rights, Jemima Wilkinson seemed strangely reluctant in acknowledging that she was a woman at all (the "Publick Universal Friend" was gender-free).

While it is tempting to explore the  psychological and medical aspects of her mystery "illness", the life-changing effect it had on her, and her later remarkable life, there likely isn't enough information to make any definite conclusions or diagnosis in Jemima Wilkinson's case (a recurring problem in dealing with historical figures).    All that I can say for certain is that she showed considerable courage in speaking out on various issues such as slavery, war, women's rights, and poverty.  Often branded as "immoral" for  her "unfeminine activities and dress, not to mention daring to preach in public (a common accusation that women who dared to be too forward typically faced back then),  Jemima Wilkinson's influence on later feminists shouldn't be ignored.