Psychiatric governance, völkisch corporatism, and the German Research Institute of Psychiatry in Munich (1912-26). Part 2.

This is the second of two articles exploring in depth some of the early organizational strategies that were marshalled in efforts to found and develop the German Research Institute of Psychiatry (Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Psychiatrie). The first article analysed the strategies of psychiatric governance - best understood as a form of völkisch corporatism - that mobilized a group of stakeholders in the service of higher bio-political and hygienic ends. This second article examines how post-war imperatives and biopolitical agendas shaped the institute's organization and research. It also explores the financial challenges the institute faced amidst the collapse of the German financial system in the early Weimar Republic, including efforts to recruit financial support from the Rockefeller Foundation and other philanthropists in the USA.

Psychiatric governance, völkisch corporatism, and the German Research Institute of Psychiatry in Munich (1912-26). Part 1.

This is the first of two articles exploring in depth some of the early organizational strategies that were marshalled in efforts to found and develop the German Research Institute of Psychiatry (Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Psychiatrie) in 1917. After briefly discussing plans for a German research institute before World War I, the article examines the political strategies and networks that Emil Kraepelin used to recruit support for the institute. It argues that his efforts at psychiatric governance can best be understood as a form of völkisch corporatism which sought to mobilize and coordinate a group of players in the service of higher biopolitical and hygienic ends. The article examines the wartime arguments used to justify the institute, the list of protagonists actively engaged in recruiting financial and political support, the various social, scientific and political networks that they exploited, and the local contingencies that had to be negotiated in order to found the research institute.

"The assistant's bedroom served as a laboratory": documentation in 1888 of within sleep periodicity by the psychiatrist Eduard Robert Michelson.

In 1888, Eduard Robert Michelson (1861-1944), a student of the German psychiatrist Emil Kraepelin at the university clinic of Dorpat (Tartu, Estonia), established a sleep laboratory in which he conducted a fundamental and innovative study about the physiology of sleep regulation. Based on the then current theoretical concepts and methodological techniques of Wundtian experimental psychology, and Kraepelin's research strategy, Michelson, for the first time, was able to describe a "very strange phenomenon" of human sleep - a "remarkable periodicity" of the "sleep depth curve." Furthermore, Michelson postulated that this within sleep periodicity should not be explained as an effect of external stimuli but rather of "antagonistic" physiological processes. Unfortunately, Michelson's publication of 1891 fell almost into oblivion as contemporary theories of sleep could not offer an explanation for his findings. Nevertheless, Michelson's "Untersuchungen über die Tiefe des Schlafes" should be considered as one of the key studies in the development of sleep research in the 19th century and a pioneer description of within sleep periodicity.

[Bavarian mental health reform 1851. An instrument of administrative modernization]. / Die bayerische Irrenreform von 1851. Ein Instrument der administrativen Modernisierung unter König Max II. von Bayern.

By 1850 the reformation of institutional psychiatric care in Bavaria was given the highest priority by monarchy and administration. Cooperating with experts, especially the psychiatrist Karl August von Solbrig, they provided for new asylums to be established throughout Bavaria in a surprisingly short period of time. It was, however, only at personal intervention of King Max II. that the administrative and financial difficulties which had existed since the beginning of the 19th century could be overcome. The planning of asylums done by each administrative district of Bavaria vividly reflects rivalry as well as cooperation between all governmental and professional agencies involved. Modernization of psychiatry was publicly justified by referring to scientism, the need for a more progressive restructuring of administration, and the paternalistic care of the monarchy, whereas, from an administrative point of view, aspects of psychiatric treatment, like what kind of asylum would be best, were rather insignificant. The structures established by means of the alliance between state administration and psychiatric care under the rule of King Max II. had a lasting effect on the further development of Bavaria.

[The highly gifted persons study by Adele Juda 1927-1955. Pinnacle and end of psychiatric genius research in Germany]. / Die Höchstbegabtenstudie von Adele Juda 1927-1955. Höhepunkt und Ende der psychiatrischen Genialenforschung in Deutschland.

Between 1927 and 1944 the psychiatrist Adele Juda (*1888-+1949) studied the biographies of more than 600 German-speaking "geniuses" and their families from a period between 1648 and 1920. The concept of this so-called "Höchstbegabtenstudie" (study on high-gifted persons) had been developed by the psychiatrist, human geneticist and racial hygienist Ernst Rüdin, director of the Deutsche Forschungsanstalt für Psychiatrie in Munich from 1917 to 1945. Juda's study was aimed at a re-examination of the "Genie-Irrsins-Hypothese" (genius-madness-theory) having been much discussed in medicine and anthropology since Cesare Lombroso, as it was hardly consistent with some of Rüdin's racial-hygienic concepts. While trying to make a selection of probands as objective as possible and to overcome a so far common purely casuistic approach, Juda's study also gave cause for criticism, for example as to the subjectivity of psychopathological assessment or the political and ideological conditions under which data were gathered. Nevertheless the "Höchstbegabtenstudie" has to be seen as the most extensive and as well as the last scientific piece of research concerning the "Genialenproblem" having been done in the 20th century, with the material gathered being an important cultural-historical source independent of its originally intended use. As one of the most important results Juda was able to prove a significant relation between mental illness and gift. For different reasons this result was not published until after Juda's death by Bruno Schulz, one of her former colleagues at the genealogical-demographic department, in 1953 and 1955. Last not least due to the fact that they came from Rüdin's former institute these publications were not taken much notice of.

Introducción a “Las Corrientes de la investigación psiquiátrica” de Kraepelin / Introduction to Kraepelin´s “Currents of psychiatric research”

En junio de 1886 Emil Kraepelin fue nombrado Catedrático de Psiquiatría de la Universidad Imperial-Rusa de Dorpat y Director de la Clínica Psiquiátrica de la misma Universidad. Los autores describen el ambiente político y cultural del momento histórico en el que se desarrolla la actividad académica de la Universidad y los logros conseguidos por Kraepelin en su actividad docente, científica y asistencial. Se analiza también el contenido de la lección inaugural que Kraepelin impartió el 6 de septiembre de 1886, tomando como referencia el texto revisado que se publicó en 1887 en Leipzig. La psiquiatría evolutiva es considerada como la aportación científica más importante del período de Kraepelin en Dorpat

In June 1886 Emil Kraepelin was named Chair Profesor of Psychiatry at the Imperial-Russian University of the same university´s Psychiatric Clinic. The authors describe the political and cultural atmosphere of that period of history and take stock of Kraepelin´s achievements as a teacher, scientist, and clinical practitioner. They also analyze the content of his inaugural lecture of September 6, 1886, using for reference a revised text that was published a year later in Leiozig. Evolutionary psychiatry is considered the most important scientific contribution of Kraepelin´s time in Dorpat

["...so that he himself must use all his energy to control the hallucinations...". King Otto of Bavaria and Munich psychiatry around 1900]. / "...dass er selbst mit aller Energie gegen diese Hallucinationen ankämpfen muss ...". König Otto von Bayern und die Münchner Psychiatrie um 1900.

King Otto of Bavaria (1848-1916), brother of "Dreamking" Ludwig II., had suffered from a severe psychiatric disorder since he was an adolescent. According to court manners of the time the psychopathological symptoms were at first neglected. After a public scandal in 1875 Otto was treated by the Munich psychiatrist Bernhard von Gudden who used a variety of methods. These changing therapeutic measures reflected the scientific development of psychiatry during the second half of the 19th century. Since 1879 Otto, together with his princely household, was put into Fürstenried Castle near Munich where the so-called "Prinzenärzte" took over responsibility for medical care. In Fürstenried, the neuropathologist Franz Nissl, who served as Otto's "Prinzenarzt" from 1885 to 1887, brought into perfection his famous staining methods for neuronal tissue. Despite his mental incapacity Otto was proclaimed king of Bavaria after the dreamkings's death in 1886. The close connection between the "High Patient" and his doctors strengthened the social position of psychiatry as a public task.

Emil Kraepelin's 'Self-Assessment': clinical autography in historical context.

Contemporary psychiatrists and historians know very little about the life of Emil Kraepelin. Until recently they had to glean what information they could from his memoirs, which had more to say about his travels to far-flung corners of the world than about his own mental life. Now, however, a unique historical document has been uncovered which opens a window on Kraepelin's own psyche. In a manuscript written shortly after World War I, Kraepelin turned his diagnostic methods on himself and clinically documented his own state of mind. This paper reproduces a translation of Kraepelin's 'Self-Assessment' and places it in its historical context.

Introducción a las “Notas personales” de Kraepelin / Introduction to Kraepelin’s personal notes

La investigación más reciente sobre Kraepelin está dando a conocer textos inéditos que completan el conocimiento hasta ahora existente de su obra, demasiado focalizado sobre el tratado de psiquiatría. Entre estos textos póstumos se encuentran unas “Notas personales”, que pueden considerarse como un autorretrato literario de Kraepelin. En este artículo introductoria a la traducción española de las “Notas personales” sus editores ofrecen información acerca de la investigación actual en torno a Kraepelin, recuerdan los hechos principales de su vida y presentan el contenido y significación de este texto recuperado para la historia de la psiquiatría (AU)