Clio and the doctors. Psycho-history, quanto-history and history

the testimony given at the trial of Burke and Hare (pp. 5-228), thus providing an excellent collection of primary sources; all are to be found in the Fenwick Beekman Collection at the New York Academy of Medicine. There is also a brief editorial introduction and a useful list of the dramatis personae. The material is reproduced in facsimile and includes illustrations; most of the items, especially the ephemera, are very rare. From it a detailed account of the episode is obtained together with the reaction of the public to it. But in addition there are other benefits to be derived: information on the medical profession in Edinburgh during the 1820s, especially concerning anatomists and the teaching of anatomy; an appreciation of social conditions, legal procedure and of methods of communicating at that time. The only criticism is that some of the reproductions are poor, presumably due to the present state of the originals. This method of collecting together facsimiles of publications concerning a single medical episode could well be repeated, for there have been numerous events in previous centuries that generated a great deal of literature manuscript, printed, and illustrative, much of which is now very scarce. Medico-legal cases such as this one lend themselves readily to the technique, but others ranging from Mrs. Stephens' stone cure to Mary Toft's so-called rabbit breeding imposture would be ideal topics. A similar type of publication, intended, however, more for teaching and at a less specialized level, presented portfolios of copied documents illustrating advances in certain aspects of history and proved to be popular. Recently psycho-history, purveyed in the last two years mainly by the History of Childhood Quarterly, The Journal of Psycho-history and the Psycho-history Press, has come into existence. Its advocates are concerned with the subconscious, background drives, illusions, urges, obsessions and with other psychological phenomena which they believe govern a person's actions. The significance of an action does not reside in it, and an act or statement is thus a myth which has to be analysed and interpreted. Professor Barzun of Columbia University attacks this new approach to history, and also finds the application of statistics to history, quanto-history as he calls it, equally unacceptable. He puts forward powerful arguments in favour of the traditional type of historiography and will thereby receive solid support from the older generation of historians. He cites a number of ludicrous interpretations arrived at by …