John Locke’s Copy of The Secret Miracles of Nature and the NYAM Library

By Hannah Johnston, Library Volunteer

In a 1581 copy that The New York Academy of Medicine Library holds of Levinus Lemnius’s De Miraculis Occultis Naturae (or The Secret Miracles of Nature), one can find a tiny signature. Inscribed on the top right corner of the inside cover, in small but unmistakable handwriting is “John Locke.”[1] The famous philosopher and physician himself, who passed away sitting in his library in 1704, owned—and maybe read— this fascinating book of “secret miracles”; over three hundred years later, the book made its way to NYAM. Locke’s De Miraculis presents an exciting opportunity to examine how some of the Library’s most interesting possessions find their way here, but also gives us a way to learn what De Miraculis in particular can tell us about Locke.

Lemnius_DeMiraculis_1581_JohnLockesignature_watermark

John Locke’s signature can be seen at the very top right corner of our 1581 De Miraculis. NYAM Collection.

John Locke collected many books. By the end of his life, his collection was large in size and diverse in its subjects, consisting of over three thousand books on hundreds of topics.[2] There is a relative wealth of scholarship on Locke’s library, but perhaps the most extensive work is The Library of John Locke by John Harrison and Peter Laslett.[3] This particular copy of De Miraculis is catalogued in the 1971 edition of their work.[4]

Locke’s De Miraculis was a first edition copy, published in Latin in 1581 in Antwerp.[5] It is one of 35 of Locke’s books published in that city, and one of over one thousand published in Latin. It is one of 101 books which Harrison and Laslett list as focusing on “bibliography”; topics range from medicine and magic to hygiene and geography.[6]

De Miraculis is an important book in its own right, but is also known as one of the works from which the incredibly popular seventeenth-century sex manual Aristotle’s Masterpiece pulled much of its content.[7] Aristotle’s Masterpiece co-opted sections of De Miraculis which dealt with the mechanisms of pregnancy, maternal imagination, and monstrous births, among other topics. The Masterpiece is not listed in the catalog of Locke’s books (though this does not necessarily mean he never owned a copy); as an English physician in possession of many books on medicine, midwifery, and anatomy, it is plausible to assume that he could have come across the Masterpiece, first published in 1684.[8] Regardless, Locke’s ownership—and likely readership—of the Masterpiece’s source material certainly adds layers to our understanding of the famous philosopher.

Though it would be nearly impossible to know the entirety of this book’s journey—who owned it, whether and how it was read—from Locke’s library to ours, we do know some of its more notable stops along the way. The signature on the inside front cover is common among books owned by Locke, who did not frequently make other annotations in books he owned.[9] It is likely that De Miraculis was a later acquisition of Locke’s, and could have been over one hundred years old when he acquired it.[10] Nothing is known of where or how Locke got the book. It is probably a part of the “Masham moiety” of Locke’s library, the section of the library that was left in the possession of the Masham family at the manor house at Otes, which housed Locke’s library for much of his life. The Masham moiety accounts for most of the works which exist outside of the Bodleian Library at Oxford University in the United Kingdom.[11]

Lemnius_DeMiraculis_1581_EdwardDowdennote_watermark

Edward Dowden’s inscription in the 1581 version of De Miraculis. NYAM Collection.

It is likely that the book remained at Otes at least until “[the] Masham line became extinct” in 1776. At some point during the end of the 18th century, it would have been moved to Holme Park by the Palmer family. It could have remained there until around 1890, when Locke scholar A. C. Fraser deemed the Locke collection at Holme Park “dispersed.”[12] Around the early 20th century, Locke’s De Miraculis was acquired by Irish poet Edward Dowden, who died in 1913 and left an inscription confirming Locke’s ownership of the book inside the front cover. It was acquisitioned by the NYAM Library in May 1929, and has remained here ever since.

Examining Locke’s ownership of this copy of De Miraculis can provide us with quite a bit of insight into how he may have viewed his world. This book can show us what kinds of books Locke felt were worth owning, what kind of information he had at his disposal, and how he may have interpreted that information. Perhaps more fascinating, however, is how Locke’s signature has allowed us to trace much more of this book’s journey than we might have been able to otherwise. As one of only “a score or two” of the books from the Masham moiety which are extant and whose locations are known, a tiny signature makes this copy of De Miraculis rather remarkable. [13]

Special thanks go to Dr. Hannah Marcus for recognizing John Locke’s signature, and to Dr. Felix Waldmann for his wealth of knowledge on the library and life of John Locke.

References

[1] Levinus Lemnius, De miraculis occultis naturae, libri IIII. Item De vita cum animi et corporis incolumitate recte instituenda, liber unus. Illi quidem jam postremùm emendati, & aliquot capitibus aucti: hic verò nunquam antehac editus…. (Antwerp, Belgium: Ex Officina Christophori Plantini, 1581), New York Academy of Medicine Library, New York, NY.

[2] John Harrison and Peter Laslett, The Library of John Locke (Oxford, UK: The Clarendon Press, 1971).

[3] Ibid.

[4] Ibid. 171.

[5] Lemnius.

[6] Harrison and Laslett 18–20.

[7] Mary Fissell, “Hairy Women and Naked Truths: Gender and the Politics of Knowledge in ‘Aristotle’s Masterpiece,’” The William and Mary Quarterly 60 No 1, “Sexuality in Early America,” Jan 2003, 43–74.

[8] Harrison and Laslett 11.

[9] Harrison and Laslett 39.

[10] Ibid. 35–36, 171. Harrison and Laslett speculate that alphabetical suffixes indicate later acquisitions in their examination of Locke’s pressmark system.

[11] Ibid. 57.

[12] Ibid. 55–61.

[13] Ibid. 61.

The Women’s Field Army: A Precursor to the American Cancer Society

By Carrie Levinson, Reference Services and Outreach Librarian

On November 7, The New York Academy of Medicine had its Annual Discourse, where Dr. Otis W. Brawley, Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Oncology and Epidemiology at Johns Hopkins University, delivered a fascinating talk on cancer disparities and the status of anti-cancer efforts in the United States. Part of his message was that, while there are differences in diverse populations, increased awareness leads to better outcomes.

Educating the public about cancer, its symptoms, and its treatment was also of great concern to the members of the American Society for the Control of Cancer (ASCC), an organization founded in 1913 with ten doctors and five laypeople, when the disease was not widely talked about and had high mortality rates. The organization’s mission was to bring the looming specter of cancer out of the shadows and into the light, and to do that, they wrote numerous articles in both popular periodicals and academic journals, produced their own bulletin, Campaign Notes, and recruited doctors around the United States to educate patients (American Cancer Society [ACS], 2019).

While these efforts helped, they only involved about 15,000 people across the country by 1935 (ACS, 2019). In 1936, the new campaign was born to get volunteers to help spread vital information: the Women’s Field Army. The ASCC specifically recruited women “because the types of cancer that strike women hardest—cancer of the uterus and breast—may be cured in seventy per cent of the cases if taken in time” (New York City Cancer Committee [NYCCC], 1936).

ASCCC_HospitalServiceProgramOfTheWomensFieldArmy_1942_April1942_watermark

Some of the Women’s Field Army in Service, April 1942. American Society for the Control of Cancer (1942). Hospital service program of the Women’s Field Army: The American Society for the Control of Cancer, Inc. [Pamphlet]. New York, NY: Author.

Among other educational literature, the ASCC produced pamphlets promoting the Women’s Field Army. One item from 1936, used to recruit members, tells the story of a woman who started to suspect she might have cancer based on the New York City Cancer Committee’s materials, such as billboards, subway cards, and editorials in the newspaper (NYCCC, 1936). After learning more and eventually receiving the treatment she needs, she joins the Women’s Field Army so that she, too, can be a “crusader in the fight against cancer.” Other pages in the pamphlet emphasize the critical role that various women have played in helping others receive the care they need, from Maud Slye’s cancer research to Dr. Elizabeth Hurdon, founder of the Marie Curie Hospital in London (NYCCC, 1936).

NYCCC_ForAllWomen_1936_MadameCurieMaudSlye_watermark

Short descriptions of Marie Curie’s and Maud Slye’s research. New York City Cancer Committee (1936). For all women: Presented by the Women’s Field Army of the American Society for the Control of Cancer [Pamphlet]. New York, NY: Author.

A wartime NYCCC pamphlet encourages different divisions of the Women’s Field Army to set up hospital service programs as a part of the War Service Program, and describes their challenges and triumphs. The preparation and use of surgical dressings and bandages, which the Women’s Field Army determined were greatly needed, are explained in detail, from production to transportation (American Society for the Control of Cancer, 1942).

NYCCC_ForAllWomen_1936_OrganizationPlan_watermark

Map of the organization plan of the NYC Cancer Committee divisions of the Women’s Field Army. American Society for the Control of Cancer (1942). Hospital service program of the Women’s Field Army: The American Society for the Control of Cancer, Inc. [Pamphlet]. New York, NY: Author.  NYAM Collection.

Divisions and programs like Women’s Field Army greatly expanded cancer awareness; the organization is credited with increasing the number of individuals involved in cancer control from 15,000 to at least 150,000 in three years (ACS, 2019). Although the American Society for the Control of Cancer changed direction after World War II (you may know it better now as the American Cancer Society) and the Army no longer exists, it serves as an important reminder of how a group of determined volunteers can change the way we think of, and treat, cancer—or indeed any disease—today.

References

American Cancer Society (2019). Our history. Retrieved from https://www.cancer.org/about-us/who-we-are/our-history.html

American Society for the Control of Cancer (1942). Hospital service program of the Women’s Field Army: The American Society for the Control of Cancer, Inc. [Pamphlet]. New York, NY: Author.

New York City Cancer Committee (1936). For all women: Presented by the Women’s Field Army of the American Society for the Control of Cancer [Pamphlet]. New York, NY: Author.

The Michael M. Davis Papers and Economics in Medicine

By Carrie Levinson, Reference Services & Outreach Librarian

Recently, the Academy hosted a talk between Paul Krugman and Tsung-Mei Cheng, entitled “Priced Out: The Economic and Ethical Costs of American Health Care.” This event focused on Uwe E. Reinhardt’s latest book, which discusses today’s U.S. healthcare system. Krugman and Cheng delivered lively and nuanced explanations of why our system is so expensive, especially compared with other similar countries, the morality involved in having costs so high, and some potential solutions.

Michael_Davis_watermark

A photograph of Michael M. Davis from Michael M. Davis: A tribute, by Alice Taylor Davis and Gertrude Auerbach (1972?). NYAM Collection.

The debate about healthcare in the United States is not a new one, however. One notable medical economist whose collection is one of the most interesting in the Academy’s library, Michael Marks Davis, advocated for comprehensive medical care and national health insurance, and worked in many prominent organizations and committees throughout his career, including the Rockefeller Foundation, the Julius Rosenwald Fund, the Committee for Research in Medical Economics, and the Committee for the Nation’s Health (New York Academy of Medicine, n.d.).

Davis donated his collection of papers and reports in 1962. This collection is important because, among other things, it provides source material for studying some of the most significant historical legislative advances in the United States, as well as social trends of the 1920s through the 1960s, aspects of medicine and health in other countries, and confidential and other unpublished reports that likely are not duplicated elsewhere. Below is a short description of the kinds of material that can be found within these papers, originally compiled by Lee Ash (1967).

Series 1: Medical Economics and Medical Sociology

  • Material on medical care costs and studies by, for, and about the Committee on the Costs of Medical Care, including confidential reports; also material on state, industrial and cooperative medical plans, comprehensive group medical plans, and union health programs.

Series 2: Medical Care in the United States

  • Materials including confidential reports made for foundations in the United States; material on rural economic conditions from the 1930’s through the 1950s, and on rural health problems and programs, material on medical education, hospitals, and medical personnel.

Series 3: Legislation and Legal Aspects

  • Materials on legislation since 1950, and publications, reports, correspondence, and ephemera relevant to legislation prior to 1950, public assistance and child welfare, mental health, and state legislation, including sickness and disability insurance programs to be paid for by the state, and original texts of bills.

Series 4: Organizations

  • Samples of special reports, annual reports, and letters to and from Dr. Davis concerning the work of various organizations, grouped into the following sections: Professional Organizations, General Organizations, International Organizations, and Political Organizations.

Series 5: Medical Care in Foreign Countries

  • Public documentation and correspondence with leaders and private physicians concerned with social medicine and public health abroad; a good deal of material focusing on the National Health Service Act; published and unpublished reports from many other countries.

Series 6: Personalities

  • Correspondence, notes, comments, clippings, personality evaluations, and memorabilia to, from, and about all of the leaders Dr. Davis associated with in his work.
Article with graphs looking at illness and income

Article with graphs looking at illness and income in Volume 21 of the Michael M. Davis papers. NYAM Collection in Public Health in Modern America, 1890-1970 .

These short descriptions don’t even begin to cover the richness of the Davis collection. With over 400,000 pieces (Ash, 1967), it might seem insurmountable to researchers, but that’s not the case. We have an excellent finding aid that goes into more detail about the materials and how to find them, as well as giving detailed biographical information on Dr. Davis. Not enough for you? You may recall our blog post about our partnership with Gale to digitize material related to public health in America. Well, this entire collection can be found in Gale’s new database Public Health in Modern America, 1890-1970! If your institution doesn’t subscribe to it, you can make an appointment to view it at our library.

Conversation and arguments about healthcare costs and structure are unlikely to stop anytime soon, but with collections such as Davis’s available to those who are interested, we can understand the history of such discussions in going forward.

References

Ash, L. (1967). The Michael M. Davis Collection of Social and Economic Aspects of Medicine. Bulletin of the New York Academy of Medicine, 43(7), 598–608. Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1806900/

New York Academy of Medicine (n. d.). Library of social and economic aspects of medicine of Michael M. Davis [Finding aid]. New York, NY: Author. Retrieved from https://www.nyam.org/library/collections-and-resources/archives/finding-aids/ARM-0003.html/

Monstrosity and Motherhood in Seventeenth-Century English Print

By Hannah Johnston, Library Volunteer 

While today many of us would relegate monsters to fantasy books and Halloween decor, to people in seventeenth-century England, monsters were very real. Fantastical beasts were thought to inhabit the far corners of the world, but perhaps more astonishing were the “beasts” born right at home.[1] Narratives of “monstrous births” could be found in pamphlets, balladry, and even medical books, and the infants in question ranged in these texts from frightening spectacles to prodigal symbols. Of course, many of the babies deemed “monstrous” were not, in fact, monsters. For every “actual” monster – serpents, flying infants, rabbits birthed by a human woman – there was a birth which in the modern era could be explained by numerous common as well as rare conditions.[2]

Nevertheless, this fascination with abnormal births can tell us quite a bit about the many ways early modern people conceptualized and dealt with bodies that defied categorization; among these was the child’s relationship with its mother. The placing of blame on mothers for their own monstrous births reflects a frustration with the lack of understanding of the female body, as well as an interest in encouraging “proper” behavior in women.

False Lover Rewarded

The False Lover Rewarded, 1760? Huntington Library 289786, EBBA 32528. Licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0.

Most people in the 17th century would learn about a monstrous birth from cheap print sources such as pamphlets and broadside ballads. Broadside ballads in particular were incredibly popular, affordable, and widely available to the public. Often sold by female “hawkers” on the street, broadside ballads could be bought by just about anyone and were written to entertain as well as inform.[3] While some ballads were based on true (if exaggerated) events, many were entirely works of fiction. Ballads overall were more concerned with entertainment and moral policing than exploring the functional causes of abnormal births. Sensationalist in nature, they often focused on the spectacle of a single birth, and were often framed as a divine punishment for the mother’s sins or flaws.

The Lamenting Lady

The Lamenting Lady, 1620? Magdalene College – Pepys Ballads 1.44-45 EBBA 20210. Licensed under CC BY-NC 4.0.

While many ballads focused on the physical aspects of infants’ bodies, the way some births occurred were seen as monstrous in and of themselves. “The Lamenting Lady,” published circa 1620, was one such ballad, focusing on the story of a “[lady] of degree” who, despite having beauty and a comfortable lifestyle, could not bear a child.[4] One day, a “poore woman” came to her door with her two children to beg for money. The woman could not fathom why “Beggers [sic] have what Ladies want,” and became irate with the beggar, asserting that she had had her children as a result of being unfaithful to her husband.[5] To punish the woman for her jealous behavior, the beggar woman promptly cursed her:

And for these children two of mine

heaven send thee such a number

At once, as dayes be in the yeare,

to make the world to wonder.

For I as true a wife have beene,

unto my husbands love:

As any Lady on the earth,

unto her Lord can prove.[6]

Because of her unkindness towards the poor woman, the wealthy woman was cursed to give birth to three-hundred and sixty-five children in succession.[7] “The Lamenting Lady” was, of course, a fictional account. However, this chastising tone is common to even the true (or at least more believable) accounts of monstrous births. Balladry, while interested in the causes of monstrous births, was centered on using them both to entertain and to discourage the behavior that was thought to cause them.

While pamphlets and ballads were focused mostly on the spectacle aspect of monstrous births, many books, in particular medical or midwifery manuals, sought to explore their cause. Aristotle’s Masterpiece was one of several works to try to answer the pressing question of where monstrosity came from. An amalgam of earlier works by various authors, the book was first published in 1684 and remained widely popular among curious readers through the early 20th century.[8] The author (or compiler) of the work is unknown, having used “Aristotle” as a pseudonym, likely to invoke authority.[9]

Example of a "monster" in Aristotle’s Masterpiece

Example of a “monster” in Aristotle’s Masterpiece, or The Secrets of Generation displayed in all the parts thereof… London, 1684. NYAM Collection.

Among many topics pertaining to sex, pregnancy, and childbirth, included in the Masterpiece was a chapter on the causes of “monstrous conceptions.”[10] Many people believed that a monstrous conception could be caused by a birth ill-timed with the stars, or a flaw in the “seed” of either parent.[11] The Masterpiece, while acknowledging these to be true, noted another important factor in an abnormal birth – the thoughts of the parents, particularly of the mother.[12] Already a popular concept by the Masterpiece’s publication, the theory of maternal imagination stated that the pregnant mother’s feelings, experiences, and thoughts could impact the development of her child.[13] While in line with the representations of monstrous births in balladry, the theory of maternal imagination sought to explain how the mother’s actions could physically alter her unborn child’s body. In particular, an infant could become “monstrous” if its mother were to wish for, think about, or look upon a thing or person to excess. The theory of maternal imagination would have supported the interpretations of monstrous births seen in cheap print, where mothers’ sins marked the bodies of their children.

Together, the representations of monstrosity in cheap print and in books suggest an interest in finding someone to blame for the curiosity, fear, and occasional tragedy associated with abnormal births. Seventeenth-century English print constructed a connection between the actions of mothers and the bodies of children that served to entertain, inspire fear, and encourage moral behavior in mothers-to-be.

References

[1] Lorraine Daston and Katharine Park, Wonders and the Order of Nature (New York, NY: Zone Books, 1998), pp 173–214.

[2] For flying: “The False Lover Rewarded” (London, UK: 1760), EBBA; For rabbits: See the well-known case of Mary Toft, who (falsely) claimed to have given birth to rabbits. Glennda Leslie, “Cheat and Impostor: Debate Following the Case of the Rabbit Breeder,” The Eighteenth Century 27, no. 3 (1986): 269–86.

[3] Patricia Fumerton and Anita Guerrini, ed. Ballads and Broadsides in Britain, 1500–1800 (Oxon, UK and New York, NY: Routledge, 2010).

[4]The Lamenting Lady, Who for the wrongs done to her by a poore woman, for hauing two children at one burthen, was by the hand of God most strangely punished, by sending her as many children at one birth, as there are daies in the yeare, in remembrance whereof, there is now a monument builded in the Citty of Lowdon, as many English men now liuing in Lowdon, can truely testifie the same and hath seene it,” 1620? EBBA.

[5] Ibid.

[6] Ibid.

[7] Ibid.

[8] Mary Fissell, “Hairy Women and Naked Truths: Gender and the Politics of Knowledge in ‘Aristotle’s Masterpiece,’” The William and Mary Quarterly 60 No 1, “Sexuality in Early America,” Jan 2003, pp 43–74; Pseudo Aristotele, and John How, Aristotle’s Masterpiece, Or The Secrets of Generation displayed in all the parts thereof  (London, England: 1684).

[9] Fissell 47.

[10] Aristotle’s Masterpiece 51.

[11] Ibid 52.

[12] Ibid 51.

[13] Daston & Park 192.

Opium in the Library: Remedy & Reverie in the 18th and 19th Centuries

By Hannah Johnston, Library Volunteer

Writing on opium and opioids in the 20th century, particularly in the United States, was often characterized by an interest in the mechanisms of addiction, a growing concern for public health, and a widespread and a deep-rooted fear of the “dope evil.”[1] Only two centuries earlier, however, the “dope evil” was instead “a safe, and noble Panacea.”[2] While there was certainly an understanding of the addictive nature of opium and, to some extent, concern over its safety, many writers in the 18th and 19th centuries were simply fascinated by the drug.

Two works in particular, The Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d by Dr. John Jones (1645–1709) and The Seven Sisters of Sleep by botanist Mordecai Cubitt Cooke (1825–1914), showcase this interest in the origins, nature, and various uses of the drug. While differing in their goals and their opinions on the primary benefits of opium, both works demonstrate some of the ways eighteenth- and nineteenth-century writers grappled with a substance unlike any they had previously encountered. In conversation with each other, The Mysteries and The Seven Sisters can reveal how changing ideas in medicine, culture, and politics influenced the perception and use of opium in the 18th and 19th centuries.

Considered one of the first comprehensive works on the effects and mechanisms of opium, The Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d aimed to demonstrate how, when used effectively, the drug could be a reliable and incredibly useful medicine.[3] Dr. John Jones first explained the origins, nature, uses, and possible misuses of opium.[4] Jones’ book was what one might expect from an eighteenth-century English medical book—while he did devote time to discussing the history and recreational use of opium, he was most deeply invested in unearthing the mechanisms by which opium “lulls, sooths, and, as it were, charms the Mind ….[5]

Jones_Mysteries of opium reveald_1700_plate1_watermark

A table of opiate dosages to give to various populations of men and women from John Jones’s Mysteries of opium reveal’d (1701). NYAM Collection.

More than a hundred years later, in the mid-19th century, Mordecai Cubitt Cooke wrote a very different kind of opium book. The Seven Sisters of Sleep focuses on seven narcotic drugs – opium, tobacco, cannabis, betel nut, cocaine, datura (a genus of hallucinogenic plants), and fly agaric (a psychoactive mushroom) – allegorically described as the “sisters” of the Queen of Sleep, who each ruled over different portions of the world.[6] Six of Cooke’s twenty-six chapters were devoted to opium in various respects, and the appendix of the book included tables and information on the use and trade of opium on a global scale.[7] While Jones was more concerned with the proper way of producing opium, dosage for various ailments, and outlining the drug’s exact effects on the body (he noted that opium primarily impacted the stomach), The Seven Sisters was primarily focused on recreational or regular use of the drug, and offered personal accounts of experiences with opium as well as comprehensive reports of opium use, particularly in China.[8]

Cooke_SevenSistersOfSleep_1860_370_watermark

A table of opium and its substitutes, from Mordecai Cubitt Cooke’s The seven sisters of sleep: Popular history of the seven prevailing narcotics of the world (1860). NYAM Collection.

Cooke_SevenSistersOfSleep_1860_368_watermark

A table estimating the amount of people taking narcotics around the world, from Mordecai Cubitt Cooke’s The seven sisters of sleep: Popular history of the seven prevailing narcotics of the world (1860). NYAM Collection.

Writing on the possible pitfalls of opium use, Jones argued that opium “does not diminish or disable the Spirits by any means whatsoever… when duely and moderately used. Cooke, however, addressed several rather terrifying side effects of the drug.[9] He devoted his twelfth chapter to the dangers of opium, describing in vivid detail the horrifying dreams had by some opium users and noting the occurrences of violent psychotic breaks fueled by opium use.[10] While both works discuss the “noxious principle” of the drug, Cooke devotes far more discussion to its potential for misuse, perhaps reflecting a growing understanding and worry about opium’s addictive nature.[11]

Both works made a point to discuss the place of opium on the global stage; the differing ways each author approached the subject, however, reveal the rapidly increasing role of opium in British imperial activities around the world. Jones’ discussion of this subject is limited mostly to the origins of opium, where he notes the relative quality of opium sourced from different countries.[12] Cooke’s work, on the other hand, was published after the Opium Wars between Britain and China of the previous two decades, and reflects the importance of opium in British imperial growth. He described the ways that different ethnic groups used opium, particularly in Asia, and included reports on the rates of opium use throughout different parts of China.[13] Although largely refraining from the demonizing Chinese opium users, which often happened in late 19th century Britain and the United States, Cooke’s writing suggests a British fascination with opium as a cultural import as well as a recreational drug.

The Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d and The Seven Sisters of Sleep reflect the many ways in which views on opium have changed over the last three hundred years. All in all, both writers were invested in defending the use of opium, and noted the many pleasurable effects the drug had on mind and body. However, the ways in which these effects were described by each writer show how the changing political and cultural climate altered the place of opium in the public mind and on the global stage. These works can offer us a glimpse into the worldviews and events that informed the evolving understanding of opium, its uses, and its dangers.

This blog post was written to complement The New York Academy of Medicine’s  Opioid Symposium, held on Friday, September 20th, 2019. You can also “adopt” The Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d, featured in this blog post, and other related works, to help ensure their care and preservation. See more information about this here

References

[1] Several articles in [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums], Dec 1926 to Sept 1932, Volume 1, Manuscripts, New York Academy of Medicine Library, New York, NY.

[2] Dr. John Jones, The Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d (London: 1701), 1. All emphasis original unless stated otherwise.

[3] Ibid; Richard J. Miller and Phuong B. Tran, “More Mysteries of Opium Reveal’d: 300 Years of Opiates,” Trends in Pharmacological Sciences 21 (August 2000), 299–304.

[4] Jones, 1.

[5] Jones, 216.

[6] Mordecai Cubitt Cooke, The Seven Sisters of Sleep: Popular History of the Seven Prevailing Narcotics of the World (London: 1860), 1–5.

[7] Ibid, 357–371.

[8] Ibid, 163–180, 357–371.

[9] Jones, 81.

[10] Cooke, 163–180.

[11] Jones, 1; Cooke.

[12] Jones, 6.

[13] Cooke, 132–148, 366–368.

Opium in the Library: A ‘Smorgasbord’ of Twentieth-Century Understandings of Addiction and Drug Use

By Hannah Johnston, Library Volunteer

“For sale in the open market — misery, degradation, crime, shame, disgrace, and untold suffering — who’ll buy, who’ll buy? … All the world, apparently.”[1] In her 1927 New York American article, “Disgrace and Crime Sold Openly in the Opium Market!”, Winifred Black bemoaned the toll that the opium trade and widespread use of the drug took on the American people.[2] She cautioned readers grimly of the fate of opium smokers, warning that using the drug would lead them to become “flitting shadows of men.”[3]

Dunham_Clippings_1927_BlackArticle_watermark

Winifred Black’s article in the February 22, 1927 New York American. NYAM Collection.

Black’s alarming article sits with hundreds of companions in a handmade, three-volume collection of clippings of news articles about narcotics dating from 1926–1932. The articles may have been collected by Lawrence Boardman Dunham Sr. (1882–1959), who was heavily involved in efforts to stem New York City’s drug trade in the 1920s and 1930s.[4] The collection was acquired by the NYAM Library in 1950.

More than fifty years later, in 2013, Thomas Reed donated an assortment of his own. Aptly titled Smorgasbord for Newcomers, and compiled in the 1970s by Reed and his colleague Herschel Kaminsky, the four-volume collection contains various photocopied writings and pieces pertaining to New York’s controversial Addiction Services Agency (ASA) from 1967–1975.[5] Founded in 1967, the ASA coordinated and operated drug rehabilitation programs in the city.[6] The Smorgasbord covers the Agency’s history, therapeutic approaches, legal battles, and much more.[7] Together, the narcotics article clippings and the Smorgasbord showcase the changing ways the U.S. handled and conceptualized opioid use and addiction, and demonstrate how these kinds of collected materials are exciting historical artifacts in and of themselves.

Lawrence Boardman Dunham’s apparent understanding of the drug crisis of the 1920s and 1930s, as evidenced by the clippings he chose to collect, was colored by a morality-based concern for the consequences of drug use and the drug trade.[8] The articles expressed concern and even outright fear over specific drugs — morphine, heroin — as well as over the vague but terrifying catchalls “narcotics” or “dope.” Writers stressed the threats drugs posed to society, particularly noting the supposed relationship between drugs and criminal activity. Just one day after her “Disgrace and Crime” article, Winifred Black published again in New York American on the issue of opium, this time warning the public of addicts themselves. She asserted that “[many] of the most brutal murders in America have been committed under the urge for morphine.”[9]

To the modern eye, these articles seem highly sensationalized, but their use of what we might today see as fear-mongering suggests a vested interest in prevention (as opposed to treatment) of addiction, particularly through the “education” offered by the articles. “Ignorance is the ally of the Drug Menace,” quipped an article in the Boston Daily Advertiser. “Knowledge is its enemy — the ONLY enemy which can scotch the serpent, and, some day, slay it!”[10]

Dunham_Clippings_1927_FearNarcoticsArticle_watermark

“FEAR Narcotic Drugs!” in the February 23, 1927 Boston Daily Advertiser. NYAM Collection.

In the intervening years between the sensational news stories of the narcotics clippings and the politically fraught world of the Smorgasbord, New York City saw numerous political as well as medical changes in the way drug use was understood and managed on a citywide level. In 1944, at the request of Mayor Fiorello H. LaGuardia (for whose first mayoral campaign, it should be noted, Dunham was the campaign manager), a committee formed by the New York Academy of Medicine released a report on “The Marihuana Problem in the City of New York.”[11] Although the LaGuardia Report debunked claims that this particular drug caused “delinquency” and crime, it confirmed larger-scale prevailing ideas about drug use even as it refuted them — namely its social nature.[12]

This continuity with the world of the narcotics clippings, however, contrasts with the apparent growing government interest in more deeply understanding drugs — in particular opioids —  and those who used them. The contents of the Smorgasbord reflect this ongoing shift. In particular, the first volume of the Smorgasbord reveals the ways the Addiction Services Agency engaged with changing views of addiction — while many powerful figures in the early years of the agency clung to moral and social understandings of opioid addiction, the document makes clear the growing trend towards understanding addiction as a physiological affliction.[13] Reed and Kaminsky’s collections reveal an agency with changing and conflicting ideas, motives, and goals in the growing opioid crisis of the 1960s and 1970s.

The narcotics article clippings from Lawrence Boardham Dunham and the Smorgasbord are wonderful and rare sets of materials. Both collections offer a snapshot of the country’s (and particularly New York City’s) understanding of narcotic drugs. However, the collections also reflect the positions and motivations of the individuals who compiled them. As modern readers, we can learn much from them — both from what is in them and from what has been left out. The clippings and the Smorgasbord can show us how the U.S. grappled with addiction at different points in the 20th century, but can also reveal the ways in which the compilers’ own thoughts and feelings influenced the stories they put together.

This blog post was written in anticipation of The New York Academy of Medicine’s upcoming Opioid Symposium on Friday, September 20th, 2019. See more details and register here. You can also “adopt” the two works featured in this blog post, which will help ensure their care and preservation. See more information about this here

References

[1] Winifred Black, “Disgrace and Crime Sold Openly in the Opium Market!”, New York American, February 22, 1927, from [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums], Dec 1936 to Sept 1932, Volume 1, Manuscripts, New York Academy of Medicine Library, New York, NY.

[2] Ibid.

[3] Ibid.

[4] Description for [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums].

[5] Thomas Reed and Herschel Kaminsky (compilers). Smorgasbord for Newcomers, circa 1967–1975, Volume 1, Manuscripts, New York Academy of Medicine Library, New York, NY.

[6] “A Political History of the Addiction Services Agency,” Smorgasbord, Volume 1, Part ii, 23.

[7] Reed and Kaminsky, Smorgasbord.

[8] [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums].

[9] Winifred Black, “Opium Held Accountable for All Drug Addict Evils,” New York American, February 23, 1927, [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums]. It should be noted that Black, along with many of her contemporaries, use the word “opium” seemingly to refer to opioid drugs such as morphine as well as or instead of pure opium itself.

[10] “FEAR Narcotic Drugs!”, Boston Daily Advertiser, February 23, 1927, [Lawrence Boardman Dunham clippings and correspondence albums].

[11] Mayor’s Committee on Marihuana. The marihuana problem in the city of New York : sociological, medical, psychological and pharmacological studies.  Lancaster, PA: The Jaques Cattell Press, 1944.

[12] Ibid.

[13] “A Political History of the Addiction Services Agency,” Smorgasbord, Volume 1, Part ii.

Desegregating Harlem Hospital: A Centennial

This guest post is from Adam Biggs, faculty at the University of South Carolina Lancaster and panelist at the recent Academy Race & Health series event, “How Long Will We Wait? The Desegregation of American Hospitals.” Professor Biggs teaches courses in African American Studies and U.S. History, and his research explores the desegregation process at Harlem Hospital from 19191935.

“As I look back with charity at that period,” wrote Aubré Maynard in 1978, “I deplore the fact that I suffered more from the hostility and jealousy of some of my black colleagues than from the antipathy of whites, from whom I expected frank racial animosity.”[1] Lingering more than fifty years after he joined Harlem Hospital as one of its first black interns, Maynard’s feelings of resentment stemmed from acrimony that emerged during the desegregation process. After successfully overcoming white opposition, a heated debate broke out in Harlem over how best to utilize the facility in the interest of racial justice. But rather than a “magic bullet” for the problem of race, desegregation became a mirror of truth, exposing endemic obstacles to racial equality still deeply embedded within the medical profession and internalized within Harlem’s black medical community.

HarlemHospital_Ward_1929_watermark

Harlem Hospital ward, 1929. Image: Harlem Hospital records, 1887-1962, NYAM Collection.

Black civic activists had been advocating to desegregate New York’s municipal hospital system since the early 1910s.[2] But black practitioners would not gain entrance until the nation’s wartime effort placed a burden on medical staffing that could not be ignored. With a reluctant city administration, a small number of practitioners began acquiring low-level positions as early as 1917, and in August 1919, Louis T. Wright became the first black doctor to join the Harlem Hospital staff.[3] Continued advocacy over the next decade pushed the hospital to gradually incorporate black physicians and nurses into its ranks.

HarlemHospital_NurseClass_1929_watermark

Nurses of the class of 1929, Harlem Hospital, New York City. Image: Harlem Hospital records, 1887-1962, NYAM Collection.

This process, however, was not without challenges. For many of the established white staff, the presence of African Americans proved untenable. Shortly after their appointments, the hospital saw a mass exodus of white practitioners who transferred or resigned in protest. Many of those remaining displayed their discontent by acting with belligerence or passive aggression toward the new black hires.[4] Tensions reached a peak in 1927 when a hospital riot was barely averted after a junior white intern, dining in the cafeteria, threw water in the face of Aubré Maynard, a senior resident at the time.[5] Well publicized incidents such as this one amplified the hospital’s toxic racial climate and undermined the public’s trust.

In 1929, Mayor James Walker responded by reorganizing the municipal hospital administration. His reforms led to the dismissal of twenty-three white and two black physicians along with the appointment of twelve new black doctors and the promotion of Louis Wright to the Harlem Hospital board. Within a year, African Americans came to represent approximately forty percent of physicians on staff, making Harlem Hospital the first municipal institution of its kind to embrace the ideal of integration.[6]

Louis-T-Wright-colleagues-Harlem-Hospital-NY

Louis T. Wright and colleagues at patient bedside, Harlem Hospital, New York, N.Y. From left to right: Dr. Lyndon M. Hill, Dr. Louis T. Wright, Dr. Myra Logan, Dr. Aaron Prigot, unidentified African American woman patient, and unidentified hospital employee. Image: Joe Covello (for Black Star), CC-BY SA 3.0

But, while meaningful, the celebration was short-lived. Conflicts soon emerged over who should receive the coveted appointments and whether to transform the hospital into a cutting-edge integrated research facility or an institution dedicated to the training of black personnel.[7] Harlem’s local black medical association, the North Harlem Medical Society, split in two between those supporting and those opposing the hospital administration.[8] Bitter rivalries formed between graduates of black medical programs and those from predominantly white medical schools.[9] Not isolated to Harlem, the conflict also attracted the attention of the national black press, the National Medical Association, and the NAACP. Prominent churches, political leaders, and labor organizations throughout the city got involved as well. Louis Wright became a focal point of contention. A representative of the hospital administration and graduate of Harvard Medical School, opponents labeled him an “Uncle Tom” while supporters characterized the attacks against him as petty envy.[10]

The conflict came to an end in March 1935 when a riot broke out in Harlem. E. Franklin Frazier, a prominent black sociologist, investigated the cause of unrest and determined the hospital’s perpetual discord was a contributing factor.[11] In the years that followed, Harlem’s medical community directed greater public attention toward matters of patient care.

Latent resentment, however, lingered for decades. In 1952, despite an illustrious career, when Wright was nominated for the National Medical Association’s distinguished service award, he received only one vote.[12] Public doubts about black doctors and Harlem Hospital also persisted. Maynard lamented that accepting black doctors onto its staff had the ironic side-effect of diminishing the hospital’s reputation among Harlem residents.[13] Local political figures and New York’s medical community held similar doubts. In 1958, when Martin Luther King, Jr., was taken to Harlem Hospital for emergency care, one nurse in attendance recalled, “a lot of time was wasted while they argued.…They didn’t want to take him to the black hospital.”[14]

HarlemHospital_CorettaScottKing_1958_watermark

Coretta Scott King in children’s ward of Harlem Hospital with flowers sent to Martin Luther King, Jr., September 1958. Image: Harlem Hospital records, 1887-1962, NYAM Collection.

More than a celebratory centennial, the story of desegregation at Harlem Hospital raises meaningful questions about how best to address the problem of race in medicine. The conflicts that emerged within Harlem’s black medical community were not peculiar racial idiosyncrasies but, rather, emblematic of unresolved tensions evident in the profession at large and unaddressed in the hospital reforms. Desegregation proved not to be a miracle cure but instead led to a renewed call for black doctors to further interrogate the deeply embedded, protean forms of racial exclusion that endured in their profession and American society. Today, it reminds us that even watershed victories require continued vigilance and an unyielding commitment to the pursuit of racial justice.

References

[1] Aubré de L. Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story  (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts, 1978). 51.

[2] Michael L. Goldstein, “Black Power and the Rise of Bureaucratic Autonomy in New York City Politics: The Case of Harlem Hospital, 1917–1931,” Phylon 41, no. 2 (1980): 191.

[3] Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story: 18-25.

[4] Louis Tompkins Wright. “I Remember….” In Louis T. Wright Papers, Box 130-1, Folder 12. Manuscript Division, Moorland–Spingarn Research Center, Howard University, n. d. p. 93–94; Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story: 23.

[5] Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story: 43.; “Barely Avert Riot at Harlem Hospital,” New York Amsterdam News, 6 July 1927, 1, 2.

[6] “Harlem Hospital Staff Is Reorganized, Giving Place to Nineteen Negro Doctors.” New York Age, 22 February 1930, 1.

[7] Ibid.

[8] “Doctors Quit North Harlem Society to Form New Medical Body; Old Body Repudiated,” New York Age, 24 May 1930, 1, 3.

[9] Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story: 53.

[10] “Plan City Hall March in Fight on Hospital,” New York Amsterdam News, 8 March 1933, 1, 2; Vanessa Northington Gamble, Making a Place for Ourselves: The Black Hospital Movement, 1920–1945 (New York: Oxford University Press, 1995), 58–66.

[11] Charles V. Hamilton, Adam Clayton Powell, Jr.: The Political Biography of an American Dilemma (New York: Cooper Square Press, 2002). 55–63.

[12] W. Montague Cobb, “Louis Tompkins Wright, 1891–1952,” Journal of the National Medical Association 45, no. 2 (1953): 3.

[13] Maynard, Surgeons to the Poor: The Harlem Hospital Story: 81–82.

[14] Ebony Magazine. “[IN MY LIFETIME] Goldie Brangman on Saving Martin Luther King’s Life.” 2016.

How Long Will We Wait? A Recap of Our Latest Race & Health Series Event

This guest post is by Dr. Danielle Laraque-Arena, the 2019 Scholar in Residence at the New York Academy of Medicine. She is the tenured Professor of Pediatrics, Psychiatric & Behavioral Sciences, Public Health & Preventive Medicine at SUNY Upstate Medical University (UMU), the Former President of UMU, and moderated the Race & Health Series event, “How Long Will We Wait? The Desegregation of American Hospitals” on July 10, 2019.

The Race & Health Series, a powerful series of presentations, was initiated early this year, envisioning a more just society, reviewing key lessons of the past, evaluating current status of health equity, and engaging in robust dialogue with the community on the social, economic, and systemic issues that keep all people from enjoying a healthy life. The first presentation in this series reviewed the history of the Tuskegee Syphilis Study and posed the question of whether Tuskegee could happen again. The second presentation, “How Long Will We Wait? The Desegregation of American Hospitals,” was prefaced by a showing of the documentary film, Power to Heal: Medicare and the Civil Rights Revolution, followed by a community-engaged discussion of the implications of the film for our current-day realities.

race_health_1

The Academy Library displayed archival Harlem Hospital photos in the lobby.

Barbara Berney, Ph.D., M.P.H. produced the documentary film. Dr. Berney, a distinguished scholar in public health, environmental justice and the US healthcare system, joined us from the shores of California. Barbara was joined by Professor Adam Biggs, an American historian from the University of South Carolina. The two scholars spoke to the diverse audience of about 300 people from the Harlem area, New York City, and New York State at large. They took us on a historical journey of the deeply segregated United States of the Jim Crow period. Their focus was on recounting the impact of Jim Crow state and local laws that dictated every aspect of life for black Americans following Reconstruction. During this period, segregation was mandated in all public facilities such as restrooms, restaurants, hotels/motels, schools, and hospitals. Professor Biggs highlighted the period from 1919–1935, focusing on the desegregation of Harlem Hospital. The audience, many of whom work or have worked at Harlem Hospital, were on the edge of their seats for this important discussion.

race_health_6

The author (left) with panelists Barbara Berney and Adam Biggs.

The background analysis of the Jim Crow period led to a focused discussion regarding the segregation of American hospitals and the dire conditions of health care for black Americans. The response from black physicians, the formation of the National Medical Association, the advocacy efforts of the NAACP, and the force of the conviction of people of conscience throughout the United States led to the partnering of the American government under John F. Kennedy and then Lyndon B. Johnson with activists, to begin to transform the landscape of American life and politics. The palpable national tone of the bitter struggles of the Civil Rights movement—with activities such as voter registration in the southern states that often led to the murders of civil rights activists—was ever real for many who in the audience had lived through those dark days.

race_health_3

Audience members at the panel discussion respond to the speakers’ powerful remarks.

In fact, among the attendees were individuals such as Phyllis Cunningham and Roger Platt, both of whose efforts were shared in the film. I had the honor of working with both Phyllis (nurse, activist) and Roger (internist, hospital inspector) during my 24 years in the Harlem area, but had renewed respect when I witnessed—as demonstrated in the film—their immense courage during the dangerous times of the 60’s. Others featured in the film included David Satcher, M.D., Ph.D., former U. S. Surgeon General. I had the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Satcher a number of times. He spoke of the achievements of the Civil Rights movement, the passage of Medicare, and the continued aspiration for universal access for all: recognizing that health care is a right and not a privilege.

The film also reviewed the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and of Medicare in 1965. The intersection of these two landmark events leveraged their collective impact to amplify the message that health care is a human right. At the time of the passage of the Medicare legislation, the persistence of the “separate but equal” effect of Hill-Burton Act, providing for hospital construction, was alive. As Johnson noted, a hammer was needed to propel the desegregation of hospitals, and this was done by having the receipt of federal dollars in support of the care of the elderly be contingent upon desegregation of hospital services. The key lesson was that incremental progress, as had been imperfectly done in education, would not yield the fundamental results needed in health care. Civil rights were to be baked into the administrative process. Desegregation occurred through the brute application of the principle “follow the money.”

race_health_8

Audience members lined up to ask questions at the end of the discussion.

The two-hour session engaged questions from the audience. Individuals lined up to ask the obvious: How do we learn from the courage of those who achieved so much in the past decades? Does such courage exist today? What was the effect of desegregation on the elimination of health disparities—and by implication, is desegregation sufficient? The importance of history, the importance of courage under fire, and the lifelong commitment to social justice and health justice was clear from the engagement of the audience and the resounding voices of our distinguished panel.

Members and Fellows of the Academy, please follow our blog—and show your strong support for The New York Academy of Medicine by making sure your membership/fellowship dues are paid and up to date. Post a response to this blog and let us know how the Academy can work for you and continue the struggle for social justice and health equity. Thank you!

Get Your Primary Sources! Public Health in Modern America & Archives of Sexuality & Gender, Part III

By Robin Naughton, PhD

The New York Academy of Medicine Library has closed stacks, and as such, the serendipitous nature of browsing the shelves and discovering a gem stuck between two unlikely neighbors is limited to the librarians working in the Library. Thus, it is important that we provide patrons with access to the material in ways that they too can explore. This is a major goal of the Digital team, and it is made possible through a variety of digitization projects. Most recently, the Library partnered with Gale, a Cengage company, to digitize materials for two mass digitization projects: Public Health in Modern America, 1890-1970 launched in June 2019 and Archives of Sexuality & Gender, Part III: Sex and Sexuality, Sixteenth to Twentieth Centuries launched in February 2019.  Within the past year, the collaboration with Gale has helped the Library to digitize over 6,600 items, which represents almost a million images created.

Contributions

The Library contributed archival collections, and rare and historical materials for each project, providing users with access to major primary sources.

PHIAF0004-C00000-B0209700-00020

Bouton, S. M. (n. d.). Old Doc Politics is back again. New York: Public Relations Bureau Medical Society of the State of New York. Pamphlet in New York Academy of Medicine Library collection; digitized for Public Health in Modern America database.

Public Health in Modern America includes:

  • The Committee on Public Health of the New York Academy of Medicine – a collection of correspondence, reports, minutes, and documents on the significant work of the committee with New York’s health department and leading figures in public health. It is a collection about the New York Academy’s contribution and role in public health at the time.
  • Library of Social and Economic Aspects of Medicine of Michael M. Davis – a collection of the work of Dr. Davis in the early twentieth century, covering topics such as healthcare, medical economics, social security, legislation, and more.
  • Selected Public Health Pamphlets – over 2,200 pamphlets on various aspects of public health from the late nineteenth century to the mid-twentieth century.
Sanger_cover_cropped

Sanger, M. (1913?). What every girl should know. Reading, PA: Sentinel Printing Co. Book in New York Academy of Medicine Library collection; digitized for Archives of Sexuality & Gender database.

Archives of Sexuality & Gender includes:

  • Monographs – over 1,500 monographs on a variety of topics dealing with sex, sexuality, and gender.
  • Mary Ware Dennett Case Collection – an archival collection of the court case against Dennett for writing “The Sex Side of Life,” a pamphlet about sex for young people.
  • Correspondence between Eugen Steinach and Harry Benjamin – a collection of over forty years of correspondence about rejuvenation, including letters, postcards, diagrams, and photographs.

Together, these two products represent significant digitization making rare and unique materials available. Researchers can now go deep in ways not possible prior to digitization. For example, the material has optical character recognition (OCR), which means that researchers can search for a term and discover all the places where that term exists within a text, across the collection, or across the product, which includes collections from other collaborators. In addition, the products offer options to jump to diagrams, photographs, and other material types within a given item.  Thus, researchers now have direct access to substantial databases of primary source materials that they can analyze in novel ways.

External Digitization Process

Creating these products took tremendous amount of collaboration among multiple organizations and people.  For the Library, these products required the external digitization process, which was one process out of many that made it possible to seamlessly digitize this material. The external digitization process included an intricate tracking of each item digitized from the moment it was identified and taken off the shelf to moment it was returned to its place on the shelf.

The external digitization process workflow describes the steps involved.

Gale Production Process

External digitization process flowchart, created by the author.

Green indicates start and end.  White indicates steps in the process.   Yellow indicates that there are additional processes involved with their own workflows. Red indicates that there is an issue that needs to be resolved.

External digitization projects make it possible for the Library to digitize materials on a large scale and make the content available to universities and research institutions from Gale. It also makes the products created available to patrons in the Library. Thus, patrons visiting the Library can have access to these databases while in the Library.

Interested in using these databases in the Library? Click here to find out how to make an appointment to visit.

Apply for Our 2020 Fellowships

We’re pleased to announce that our two annual fellowships are open to applications!

nyam_rbr_106

The Drs. Barry and Bobbi Coller Rare Book Reading Room, where our fellowship recipients will conduct their research.

The Academy Library offers two annual research fellowships, the Paul Klemperer Fellowship in the History of Medicine and the Audrey and William H. Helfand Fellowship in the History of Medicine and Public Health, to support the advancement of scholarly research in the history of medicine and public health. Fellowship recipients spend a month in residence conducting research using the library’s collections.

Applications for our fellowships are being accepted now through late August for fellowships that may be used at any time during 2020.

Preference in the application process will be given to those whose research will take advantage of resources that are uniquely available at the Academy, individuals in the early stages of their careers, and, for the Helfand Fellowship, applications which include an emphasis on the use of visual materials held within the Academy’s collections and elsewhere. Applicants should provide information in their proposals about the collection items they plan to use, either by including a bibliography of resources they intend to consult or discussing those items in detail in the context of the application essay. Changes in the Library that are scheduled to take place beginning in the second half of 2019 will impact applicants whose projects rely heavily on 19th and 20th century serial literature or on monographs published during the second half of the 20th century. 

Applications are due by the end of the day on Friday, August 23, 2019. Letters of recommendation are due by the end of the day on Monday, August 26, 2019. Applicants will be notified of whether or not they have received a fellowship by Monday, October 4, 2019.

Prospective applicants are encouraged to contact Arlene Shaner, Historical Collections Librarian, at 212-822-7313 or history@nyam.org with questions or for assistance identifying useful materials in the library collections.

Click on their names to read blog posts about their projects from our most recent fellowship recipients, Matthew Davidson (Klemperer) and Tina Peabody (Helfand).

We look forward to hearing all about your projects!