The Neuron Doctrine, the Mind, and the Arctic

Abstract

In Reply: We appreciate Dr. Rueda Franco’s comments and his interest in our historical article on the Neuron Doctrine (1). The purpose of our article was to draw attention to the efforts of the investigators who preceded Santiago Ramón y Cajal and the interesting relationships between these researchers toward the end of the 19th century. We found it of great interest to study the efforts and personalities of different individuals who at times worked on similar topics and then drifted toward completely different careers. It is true that Norway experienced a renaissance in the 19th century, but we do not share the opinion that Fridtiof Nansen and contemporary Norwegian celebrities “put Norway on the map.” Norway has been on the map for some time now. With regard to Nansen’s pioneering scientific work, we hold the opinion that he may well have deserved the Nobel Prize in Medicine; however, we believe he deserved it not instead of but in addition to Ramón y Cajal and Camillo Golgi. Cajal, who was the chief architect of the Neuron Doctrine, is recognized as one of the greatest scientists of all time. He as well as Golgi certainly deserved the Nobel Prize for Physiology and Medicine in 1906. Golgi’s silver chromate staining method made possible Cajal’s predominant role in establishing the cellular basis of neural organization. Nevertheless, Cajal did not give much recognition to Nansen’s earlier work. Huntford, in his massive biography of Nansen, made the following blunt statement: Cajal was a provincial Spanish doctor with an heroic vision of himself and a monumental capacity for self advertisement. He was not overscrupulous in acknowledging his predecessors. He built himself up as the discoverer of the neuron theory, and the sole founder of modern neurology. To this day Cajal has been taken at his own valuation, although, in fact, he was relatively late in the field. Nansen became one of the pioneers whose work, in the process, was eclipsed. He suffered a troubled disadvantage of having published few papers, of being a lone invertebrate zoologist among medical men, and of having left the field, so that he could not keep his name to the fore. However, by the very act of definition, his work is implicitly commemorated in a celebrated medical term. (3, pp 218–219) When the Neuron Doctrine was finally promulgated in 1891, Vilhelm von Waldeyer listed six major authorities: Ramón y Cajal, Kölliker, His, Nansen, Ĺenhossék, and Retzius (8). In his doctoral thesis of 1887, Nansen stated that his studies were incomplete and that further results would be published in the future. His mind had already drifted from the central nervous system to the Arctic, however, with no return. Four days after defending his thesis in Oslo, Nansen left for Greenland with clear priorities: “I would rather take a bad degree than have a bad outfit” (8, p 125). Exit Nansen, enter Cajal. Interestingly, these two remarkable men, who never met or interacted, had much in common: physical strength and agility, love of nature and outdoor life, need for solitude, curiosity, courage, and talent for sketching and painting. A full appreciation of Cajal’s contributions have been limited by the fact that most of his primary writings were in Spanish and French (4, 5, 8). Translations of several major works are now available, but they do not give direct insight into the origins and evolution of Cajal’s work and concepts (6, 7). Instead, we chose to refer to Shepherd’s (8) excellent and extensive description of Cajal’s life and work. In the years to come, it will be interesting to look back on seminal research from previous centuries such as the recently rediscovered works of the Swedish scientist and philosopher Emmanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772). In 1740, Swedenborg described cortical globules or “cerebellula” as functionally independent units that were connected to each other by threadlike fibers. These fibers run through the white matter and the medulla down to the spinal cord and by way of the peripheral nerves to various parts of the body, forming the basis of sensation, mentation, and movement (2). This may have been the very first anticipation of the Neuron Doctrine, one and a half centuries before the concept was finally formulated (MG Yaşargil, personal communication, Dec 2000). Harald Fodstad Douglas Kondziolka