Thomas Willis, the Restoration and the First Works of Neurology

Abstract

This article provides a new consideration of how Thomas Willis (1621-75) came to write the first works of 'neurology', which was in its time a novel use of cerebral and neural anatomy to defend philosophical claims about the mind. Willis's neurology was shaped by the immediate political and religious contexts of the English Civil War and Restoration. Accordingly, the majority of this paper is devoted to uncovering the political necessities Willis faced during the Restoration of the English monarchy in 1660, with particular focus on the significance of Willis's dedication of his neurology and natural philosophy to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Gilbert Sheldon. Because the Restoration of Charles II brought only a semblance of order and peace, Willis and his allies understood the need for a coherent defense of the authority of the English church and its liturgy. Of particular importance to Sheldon and Willis (and to others in Sheldon's circle) were the specific ceremonies described in the Book of Common Prayer, a manual that directed the congregation to assume various postures during public worship. This article demonstrates that Willis's neurology should be read as an intervention in these debates, that his neurology would have been read at the time as an attempt to ground orthodox worship in the structure of the brain and nerves. The political necessities that helped to shape Willis's project also help us to better understand Willis's innovative insistence that philosophical statements about the mind should be formulated only after a comprehensive anatomical investigation of the brain and nerves.

A brief history of topographical anatomy

“…In preparing his lectures, he appears to have become dissatisfied with the … received opinions of others [and] the suspicions and guesses of my own mind …, and wrote that henceforth he intended … to believe nature and ocular demonstrations . His motivation to learn more about the anatomy of the brain, using a scalpel rather than a pen to …unlock the secret places of Man's Mind [in order] to look into the living and breathing Chapel of the Deity , may in part have reflected his devout Anglicanism: was he hoping that detailed exploration of the brain would reveal the location of the rational human soul, which he believed to act on the brain (O'Connor, ; Caron, )? The results of Willis's scepticism, prompted no doubt by his unconventional medical education, which had spared him prolonged exposure to the teachings of Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen and Avicenna, were seminal publications that collectively and quite intentionally presented the … first systematic attempt to integrate anatomical observations into a broader philosophical argument about human nature (Caron, ).…”

“…. .unlock the secret places of Man's Mind [in order] to look into the living and breathing Chapel of the Deity, may in part have reflected his devout Anglicanism: was he hoping that detailed exploration of the brain would reveal the location of the rational human soul, which he believed to act on the brain (O'Connor, 2003;Caron, 2015)? The results of Willis's scepticism, prompted no doubt by his unconventional medical education, which had spared him prolonged exposure to the teachings of Aristotle, Hippocrates, Galen and Avicenna, were seminal publications that collectively and quite intentionally presented the .…”

“…. .first systematic attempt to integrate anatomical observations into a broader philosophical argument about human nature (Caron, 2015). Willis intimated the nature of this grand design at the end of the Cerebri Anatome: .…”

Locke and projects for naturalizing the mind in the 18th century

“…2 Before the reader worries that 'neurophilosophy' is just a crude anachronism here, recall that Locke was Thomas Willis' student at Oxford, Willis who was the author of De cerebri anatome and of essays on the soul understood as the locus of mental faculties, and its physiological dimensions (on Willis on the soul see Wolfe and van Esveld (2014), Caron (2015)). But, as I discuss in what follows, this should not lead us to naïvely treat the Essay as … a piece of neurophilosophy (even of the most programmatic sort).…”

“…It thus makes no sense to describe Locke as the pupil of Willis who, using anatomical discoveries as "steppingstones," developed the "philosophy that would shape the Enlightenment and modern neuroscience"(Lega (2006), p. 569). For correctives to this view seeWright (1991) andCaron (2015). As to whether Locke may be said to be an actor in a process of 'naturalization of the soul' (not an especially clear expression itself), I return to the question below.4 For a reading of Locke which seeks to emphasize natural philosophy albeit without reverting to this heavy-handed 'underlabourer' view, seeAnstey (2011) (including his cautious comments on the latter interpretation, pp.…”