This paper contains Part II of an evaluation of the claims made for the priority of Macewen’s pre-1884 brain surgery over that of Bennett and Godlee. Although the primary sources – Macewen’s Private Journals and the Ward Records of the Glasgow Royal Infirmary – confirm that the operations were carried out when Macewen said they were, problems with the sources make it difficult to evaluate the extent to which he actually used knowledge of localization in all seven operations. What remains of the case material on the operations is examined, the accounts in unpublished sources and published versions compared, and Macewen’s use of knowledge of localization bearing on the claim for his priority evaluated. Part II concludes with citations from archival correspondence and the contemporary and near contemporary medical press confirming Macewen’s priority.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Malcolm Macmillan (2005) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: