Abstract

In the 1960s, Ida Macalpine and Richard Hunter, mother and son psychiatrists, stated that George III's medical records showed that he suffered from acute porphyria. In spite of well-argued criticisms by Geoffrey Dean and Charles Dent based on their extensive clinical experience of the acute porphyrias, Macalpine and Hunter were able to garnish extensive support for their claims from historians, psychiatrists, physicians and the media circus and their view is now surprisingly widely accepted. Recent research of George III's extensive medical records has shown that Macalpine and Hunter were highly selective in their reporting and interpretation of his signs and symptoms and that the diagnosis of the acute porphyria cannot be sustained. The basis for the false claims and the consequences for historians are considered and indicate that there is now an opportunity to reassess George III's contributions to events in his reign.

Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.