'Walking a Real Tight-rope of Difficulties': Sir Edward Heath and the Search for Stability in Northern Ireland, June 1970-March 1971

Since we know Sir Edward Heath was forced to impose direct ruleover Northern Ireland in March 1972, before launching his governmentinto a series of highly constructive (if unsuccessful) initiativesthat led to the Sunningdale Agreement, his policy and approachtowards the province during the first 18 months of his premiershiphas rarely been seen as anything other than a tale of miscalculation,poor judgement and political ignorance. However, with the openingup of various official papers over the past few years, it isnow possible to offer a more sympathetic assessment of Heath'searly attempts to deal with the situation in Northern Ireland.This assessment suggests that his policy, far from being barrenand directionless, was beginning to evolve in quite innovativeand radical directions as it sought to stabilize and reformNorthern Ireland, directions that, significantly, pre-figurethe various policy initiatives Heath took after 1972. Theseincluded the pursuit of active cooperation between London andDublin, and between Dublin and Belfast, major political changein Northern Ireland, with the full involvement of the minorityin the governance of the region, and a consideration of futureconstitutional relationships between London, Belfast and Dublin.     

Cultural policy through the prism of fiction (Michel Houellebecq)

Cultural policy studies tends to talk about fiction without actually using it. A typical move is to place it in an aesthetic realm to be protected, situated and/or critiqued. This is an eminently worthwhile activity. However, this paper explores some ways in which works of fiction may, following their own dynamic, yield significant perspectives upon the world of cultural policy itself. In what ways do fictional works offer us prisms through which to reappraise the worlds of cultural policy? What are the effects of the reconfigurative imaginative play to which they subject the institutions of that world? How are the discourses of cultural policy reframed when redeployed by novelists within free indirect style or internal monologue? The article begins by distinguishing four broad modes in which fictional works refract the world of cultural policy, and then analyses in more fine-grained detail two novels by the leading French writer Michel Houellebecq.     

A History of Depressed Skull Fractures from Ancient Times to 1800

The story of managing depressed fractures illustrates how knowledge of proven value does not always get handed down. Celsus was the first to describe sensible management for depressed fractures. As he wrote in Latin this was forgotten. Galen’s Greek writings survived forming the basis of management until the sixteenth century. In 1517, Hans von Gersdorff published a formidable illustrated surgical text. One illustration depicts an instrument for elevating depressed bone fragments. It looked dramatic but could not work and its defects were finally defined in the eighteenth century. Ambroise Paré used a bone punch just as we do today, but no later surgeon mentions this, though the instrument was well known. Elements of chance, fashion, emotionally powerful illustrations, and perhaps stubbornness had a profound effect on management delaying rational treatment for centuries.     

Is there a Rosenberg school?

Since his first book The Cholera Years appeared in 1962, Charles Rosenberg has had an enormous influence on the history of medicine. Not the least of that influence has been exercised through his role as a graduate teacher, advisor, and mentor. This article compares Rosenberg's work with that of his students, to see if there is such a historiographic identity as the "Rosenberg School." The authors, two Rosenberg students from different generations, conclude that there is not such a school, at least in the classic sense of the term. Yet they argue that certain common assumptions, or "Rosenberg Rules," have been passed on from Rosenberg to the other scholars he has influenced. They also discuss the challenges they have encountered in applying Charles's conceptual framework, worked out primarily in pre-1920 terms, to the late twentieth-century history of American medicine.