Much has been written, mostly in overly critical terms, about Jean-Martin Charcot\'s use of images in his hysteria research. Besides the images of patients Charcot produced for his clinical research, one other image has preoccupied present-day scholars-André Brouillet\'s painting Une leçon clinique à la Salpêtrière. Unveiled at the 1887 Salon in Paris, this life-sized painting depicts Charcot lecturing on hysteria to his male audience while presenting a swooning female patient. For many present-day critics, Brouillet\'s painting symbolizes Charcot\'s purported misuse of his female hysteria patients. Contrary to such interpretations, this article shows that Brouillet\'s painting did not merely serve as an iconic visual representation of Charcot\'s hysteria research but was also used by Charcot as an active epistemic tool in his research on hysterical amnesia. Through a close reading of Charcot\'s only published lecture on hysterical amnesia, which he held on December 22, 1891, I analyze the process through which Charcot generated new medical insights into hysterical amnesia. I thereby trace the decisive role that Une leçon clinique played in this process.

Biographies, articles, and meetings devoted to the founder of modern neurology, Jean-Martin Charcot, are typically dithyrambic, if not hagiographic. It seems that the striking professional and familial qualities of Charcot have erased any other characteristic of the person, and scratches on the Master image commonly have not been well accepted. With this in mind, it is interesting to present and evaluate the rather negative opinions on Charcot by the famous French writer Léon Daudet, who initially was very close to the Charcots through his father, Alphonse Daudet, and who wrote rather extensively on Charcot in his diary and memoirs. Our point is not to underline these writings as the \"truth\" about Charcot\'s personality and life (Daudet, who was a prominent extreme right-wing figure, was known to exaggerate and play with his sharp opinions), but Daudet\'s criticisms paradoxically provide a fascinating perspective, which may help to reconstruct better who Charcot really was in counterbalancing a bit the overcrowded, politically correct, praising group.

The establishment of neurology schools in Latin America during the late-nineteenth and early-twentieth centuries profoundly influenced the French neurology school. In the latter half of the nineteenth century, the neurology department at the Salpêtrière Hospital in Paris held a preeminent position as the global hub of neurology. Professor Jean-Martin Charcot, widely acclaimed as the father of modern neurology, was the most revered neurology professor of the nineteenth century. Many physicians from diverse countries across South America (notably Argentina, Uruguay, Peru, Brazil, and Colombia), the Caribbean (Cuba), and Mexico pursued specialized training in neurology under Charcot\'s tutelage, and even after his passing in 1893, they continued their training with his numerous disciples. As a result, nearly two centuries after the birth of Charcot, his enduring contributions to the field of neurology remain vibrantly influential, particularly in Latin America.

In the scientific world, Professor Jean-Martin Charcot is known for his contribution to the establishment of the anatomo-clinical method in neurology in Paris at the Salpêtrière hospital. However, media attention in the late 1800s has focused on his work on hysteria. In this article, we aim to review how he has been depicted in two recent French movies: Augustine (2012) and Le Bal des Folles (The Mad Women\'s Ball) (2021). We will compare his image in those two films to articles at the time of his death and contrast how he is represented in other biographical works. Both in the newspapers and in the movies, Charcot\'s public lessons and experimental work on hypnosis in hysteria are put forward. The two movies offer a new perspective, as both directors were women, and both movies focus on a woman patient\'s journey at La Salpêtrière. His depiction remains superficial in Le Bal des Folles, portraying a cold, insensitive, and despotic approach to patients. He plays a more central role in Augustine, in which he develops intimacy with one of his patients and a more human and caring side is displayed, in parallel to his authoritative and meticulous figure. Both movies refer to him as a divine authority, but they also allude to his scientific method. In summary, Charcot\'s recent representations in cinema add a woman\'s perspective to life under Charcot at La Salpêtrière, which continues to shape further the image we have of this founder of modern neurology.

Jean-Martin Charcot is considered the founding father of modern neurology. There are many general and specialized biographies about him, the result being that a new text is unexpected or would likely amount to plagiarism. However, part of the duties for Charcot\'s medical professorship have not, to date, been studied at all. This article will focus on the role of Charcot as a member of doctorate juries and, in particular, as the president of these juries. I have reviewed around 12,500 theses one by one. These were defended at the Paris medical school from 1862, Charcot\'s first year as an agrégé (assistant professor), to his death in 1893. Among the theses, I have selected all of those that discuss neuropsychiatry in the broadest terms (3,663). I have paid particular attention to all of those for which Charcot was part of the jury. This involves 608 theses. All of the data were entered in a database (Filemaker) to facilitate identifying those theses corresponding to one or more of the criteria. Statistical comparisons were then carried out (Excel spreadsheet). In addition to these results, brief individualized surveys were conducted on theses selected for their representativeness, either for the subject matter (multiple sclerosis, aphasia, tabes, general paralysis, etc.) or for specific criteria (foreigners, women, etc.), but all of the theses were defended before a jury that included Charcot. This makes it possible to track how the areas of study in the medical world changed over time, and particularly those of Charcot. The juries Charcot was obliged to be a part of, without any particular ties to the candidate and/or any involvement in the selection and supervision of the work, must be differentiated from the thesis juries for his students. In the latter case, the thesis subjects were most often linked to Charcot\'s researches. Providing a thesis subject was motivated, in certain cases, by the desire to disseminate new data in the medical profession, not only by dint of the theses themselves but also through the reports that the medical press published regularly (e.g. the diagnosis of various types of shaking) and through the commercial publication of these data, in some cases with a preface by Charcot. In other cases, the thesis was a step in the long process of developing a theory (hysteria). Or it led to a flowering of new ideas, insufficiently proven, which Charcot would only cover in his Lessons once there was convincing confirmation (amyotrophy). This rich cornucopia gives rise to certain neglected nuggets, as well as works that have entered the classical corpus-for example, the theses of Léopold Ordenstein, Ivan Poumeau, Isaac Bruhl, Albert Gombault, and Pierre Janet.

Current scientific literature often defines gout as morbus dominorum, in agreement with the Greek-Roman representation of podagra (ποδάγρα, literally \"foot-trap\") as a consequence of gluttony and libertinage. Several authors place the origins of this expression with the Roman writer Suetonius, without however quoting any specific primary source. We have investigated this problem again and scrutinized primary sources ranging from the Roman World to the early Middle Ages. A search on the database of Latin texts for the expression morb* domin* failed to identify any positive correspondence, not only in Suetonius\' works but also in those of other Latin authors. As a matter of fact, the expression morbus dominorum appeared for the first time in the literature on podagra in 1661 in Jakob Balde\'s book Solatium Podagricorum. Since then, this definition has been endlessly repeated in seventeenth- to eighteenth-century literature on gout. In 1866, while lecturing on the diseases of the elderly, the French neurologist Jean-Martin Charcot first ascribed the expression morbus dominorum to Suetonius. However, this attribution is unsupported by primary sources. In conclusion, Suetonius never used the wording morbus dominorum, which was probably coined by Jakob Balde in 1661. The origin of this erroneous ascription dates to Jean-Martin Charcot\'s lectures in 1866. Key Points • Albeit a much-quoted sentence in rheumatology,the Roman author Suetonius never called gout morbusdominorum. • When referencing historical point in rheumatology, a careful perusal of the primary sources should beimplemented to avoid misquoting and false myths.

This overview of the history of diagnosis and treatment of multiple sclerosis serves as an introduction to the rich history of multiple sclerosis, and shows we are on a continuum of incremental advances that date back centuries.
The current understanding of MS demonstrates a dramatic series of advances and this brief historical overview will provide some context for these discoveries. Although cases we would now recognize as multiple sclerosis can be found in older literature and diaries, the contribution of Jean-Martin Charcot at the Salpêtrière in Paris in 1868 was to frame the clinical and pathological features of a disorder he called la sclérose en plaque disséminées. Soon after, reports came from many countries. Over the next half-century, the diagnosis was a clinical conclusion with no confirmatory tests. Some CSF and evoked potential tests later helped but it remained for the MRI imaging and oligoclonal banding to substantially aid the clinical diagnosis. It is tempting to think that therapy is new in MS, but in previous centuries, hundreds of drugs, procedures, and surgeries were applied to patients with MS, many more than we use today. It remained for the development of the randomized clinical trial to show which therapies were beneficial and safe. Everything changed in 1993 when the first of a long list of new therapies was approved, therapies that were shown to alter the activity and outcome of the disease.

Jean-Martin Charcot coined the term Duchenne-Aran atrophy. The inversion of names compared to standard practice shows the respect Charcot had for Guillaume Duchenne de Boulogne, who had encouraged him to study nervous disease. Using innovative localised electrification, Duchenne identified various types of muscular atrophy which he distinguished from paralysis. But it was François-Amilcar Aran who, published the observations that he had compiled and studied with Duchenne\'s help first in 1848 and again in 1850. The result was the seminal articles that led to the eponym \"Aran-Duchenne hand\". Focusing on the second half of the nineteenth century in Paris, this article will explore how knowledge evolved around the nosography of different types of muscular atrophy, starting with Duchenne and Aran and then with Charcot and his students, notably Albert Gombault, Joseph Babiński, Fulgence Raymond, and Jean-Baptiste Charcot. This historical overview is accompanied by a biographical account aimed at rescuing Aran from the sea of oblivion and covering the other subjects he wrote about, especially in neurology: including cerebral hydatid disease, skull base fractures and \"cancer of the dura mater\".

Albert Pitres (1848-1928) was an internist, neuropsychiatrist, professor of anatomy, pathology, and histology. He never really had a biography in English. However, the development of neurology and neurosciences in Bordeaux owes a lot to him, as to the psychiatrist Emmanuel Régis (1855-1918). The fact that his career was so closely linked with Charcot (1825-1893) should have secured him a more prominent place in neurology and the history of aphasiology. Pitres went on to co-author clinical and experimental research papers with Charcot that are considered some of the most notable ones among Charcot\'s publications. Both carried out studies about pathological correlations between cortical lesions and hemiplegia, published series of articles and two major books about neurophysiology of motor control. To convey the atmosphere and the importance of the neurological clinic of Pitres in the heyday, we illustrate this article with unpublished photos of him.

Jean-Martin Charcot was one of the most influential physicians of the nineteenth century and is now rightly considered the father of Neurology. The aim of this paper was to review and describe Charcot\'s close relationships to Britain and the influence of this particular affinity on his career.