Proceedings Of The Fourth Annual Meeting Of The European Association For The History Of Psychiatry (Eahp), The European Club For The History Of Neurology (Echn), And The International Society For The History Of The History Of The Neurosciences (Ishn)

Abstract

Osphresiology, though beginning with Aristotle, and the title of a classical monograph from 1819 by Cloquet, has, like the human sense of smell itself, played a relatively modest role, compared to other sensory functions. The anatomical and physiological connections of the nose to the brain proved to be more complex than those of sight, hearing and even touch, and were therefore poorly understood before the second half of the 19th century. Moreover, the close association between smell and taste gave rise to much controversy regarding the respective roles of the first and the fifth cranial nerves. Next, came the unfolding of the evolutionary influence of cerebral structure and function ‐ viz Broca's “limbic”; concept, and the “olfactory desert”; in the brains of “anosmatic”; animals. Jackson's “uncinate”; seizures featuring olfactory hallucinations brought the hippocampal formation into focus. Finally, there were the clinical manifestations of hyposmia and hyperosmia, from “coryza”;, the common cold, to injury or neoplasms causing hyposmia, as well as some endocrine alterations causing hyperosmia. (And let us not forget Charles Huysman's “Against the Grain”; and Marcel Proust's evocative fragrant madeleine.)     

The Failure of Restored British Rule in Revolutionary Charleston,South Carolina

The two-year occupation of Charleston, South Carolina, during the American Revolution demonstrates that umbrages suffered under military rule played a significant role in turning civilians in the 13 colonies against the British Empire. Despite British attempts to encourage loyalty by giving loyalists a say in government, stabilising the economy and guaranteeing the safety of slave property, Charleston's occupation regime failed to win local hearts and minds due to inconsistent and arbitrary policies, conflicts between military and civilian authorities and the unwillingness of imperial officials to restore full civil government to the province. As a result, South Carolinians lost faith in Charleston's restored royal administration long before British defeat on the battlefield secured American independence.