History and neuroscience: an integrative legacy

Synthesis of contraries: Hughlings Jackson on sensory-motor representation in the brain

This paper examines the concept of representation in the brain which occurs in the writings of the neurologist John Hughlings Jackson (1835-1911). Jackson was immersed in Victorian physiological psychology, a hybrid of British associationism and a reflex theory of the operation of the nervous system. Furthermore, Jackson was deeply influenced by Herbert Spencer, and I argue that Spencer's progressivist evolutionary ideas are in tension with the more mechanistic approach of the reflex theory. I also discuss Jackson's legacy in the 20th century and the longstanding debate about localisation of function in the brain.

Why Study the History of Neuroscience?

The history of neuroscience is the memory of the discipline and this memory depends on the study of the present traces of the past; the things left behind: artifacts, equipment, written documents, data books, photographs, memoirs, etc. History, in all of its definitions, is an integral part of neuroscience and I have used examples from the literature and my personal experience to illustrate the importance of the different aspects of history in neuroscience. Each time we talk about the brain, do an experiment, or write a research article, we are involved in history. Each published experiment becomes a historical document; it relies on past research (the "Introduction" section), procedures developed in the past ("Methods" section) and as soon as new data are published, they become history and become embedded into the history of the discipline ("Discussion" section). In order to be transparent and able to be replicated, each experiment requires its own historical archive. Studying history means researching books, documents and objects in libraries, archives, and museums. It means looking at data books, letters and memos, talking to scientists, and reading biographies and autobiographies. History can be made relevant by integrating historical documents into classes and by using historical websites. Finally, conducting historical research can be interesting, entertaining, and can lead to travel to out-of-the-way and exotic places and meeting interesting people.

One, no-one and a hundred thousand brains: J.C. Eccles, J.Z. Young and the establishment of the neurosciences (1930s-1960s)

Contemporary neurosciences have grown beyond the limits of a natural science. To its most vocal advocates, the study of the human brain can provide nothing short of the basis for a new science of man-the link between the "natural" and "human" sciences-as a simple consequence of the growing mass of facts relating to this most marvelous organ, accumulated in the last four decades. This straightforward picture of the growing import of the neurosciences simplifies and obscures the myriad different interpretations and images of "the brain" that have inspired the development of the neurosciences. Among them, this chapter will consider two deeply contrasting early images of the brain: the cellular-physiological brain proposed since the 1950s by John Carew Eccles, and the model-"whole" brain championed by John Zachary Young. Eccles' program was focused on the vertebrate synapse, and Young's on the whole brain of an "advanced" invertebrate (the octopus). The former was the programmatic extension of a long neurophysiological tradition, and the latter an outspoken attempt at providing a revolutionary model for the organization of an unprecedented research effort. One underscored continuity and scientific "soundness," and the other promised rupture and new, imaginative solutions to age-old problems. Nevertheless, they have been later lumped together into a single, marvelous and progressive history, or mythology, of the Science of the Brain. This chapter will show how the organizing principle of these two opposed (if almost equally successful) research efforts was not the foggy, ever-changing image of an experimental brain-in-becoming, but the clear, fixed horizon of a promised brain.

Neuroscience without borders: Preserving the history of neuroscience

Over the last 50 years, neuroscience has enjoyed a spectacular development, with many discoveries greatly expanding our knowledge of brain function. Despite this progress, there has been a disregard for preserving the history of these discoveries. In many European countries, historic objects, instruments, and archives are neglected, while libraries and museums specifically focusing on neuroscience have been closed or drastically cut back. To reverse this trend, the Federation of European Neuroscience Societies (FENS) has organized a number of projects, including (a) the History of Neuroscience online projects, (b) the European Brain Museum Project (EBM), (c) the History online library, (d) the FENS meeting History Corner, (e) history lectures in historic venues, and (f) a series of history seminars in various European venues. These projects aim to stimulate research in, and increase awareness of, the history of European neuroscience. Our seminars have attracted large audiences of students, researchers, and the general public, who have supported our initiatives for the preservation of the history of neuroscience for future generations and for the promotion of interest in the history of neuroscience. It is therefore urgent to develop new methods for preserving our history, not only in Europe but also in the rest of the world, and to increase greatly teaching and research in this important aspect of our scientific and cultural legacy.

British Romantic Generalism in the Age of Specialism, 1870-1990

This essay explores the impact of 'generalism' and 'general practice' on the specialisation of British medicine using the case of neurology in Britain to reveal characteristics of British 'generalist medical culture' from 1870 to 1990. It argues that 'generalism' represented a particular epistemological position in Victorian medicine, one that then created a natural bridge between science and medicine over which almost all physicians and scientists were comfortable walking. The legacies of that Victorian 'generalist preference' exerted an enduring impact on the specialisation process as physicians experienced it in the twentieth century and as this case of neurology reveals so clearly. Neurologists and general physicians would still be arguing about the relative merits of a general medical education into the 1980s. By then, however, the emergence of government bodies promoting specialist labour conditions would have rendered the process seemingly inexorable.