Editorial

I have long been fascinated by those who have left medicine to pursue a full-time career as a historian though they are few in number. One of the most notable was Dr William Stukeley FRS FSA (1687–1765). He was born in Lincolnshire and in 1707 began a medical degree at Cambridge, followed by training at St Thomas’ Hospital under the guidance of Dr Richard Mead. He had previously shown an interest in dissection and whilst in London, he also studied with George Rolfe as well as becoming associated with a group of anatomist–antiquarians which included William Cheselden. It was amongst such men that Stukeley became fascinated with archaeology and the early history of Britain which was to later play such a major role in shaping his own professional life.

In 1710, Stukeley returned to Lincolnshire and established his first practice in Boston. During the summer months, he took leave to complete tours of the country, writing detailed notes of his archaeological and historical finds. Such were his real interests that in 1717 he decided to leave his practice and return to London. This was a successful move as the following year he was elected as Fellow of the Royal Society where he first met Sir Isaac Newton, from which time the two men enjoyed a long friendship. Stukeley also became the first Secretary of the newly created Society of Antiquities as well as being instrumental in establishing the Society of Roman Knights with the particular aim of understanding the history of the Roman conquest of Britain.

In 1719, he was awarded his MD from Cambridge and the following year was successfully admitted to the Royal College of Surgeons. However, Stukeley did not leave London until 1726 when he returned to the small Lincolnshire market town of Grantham to restart his medical career. Sadly, it appears that he found it increasingly difficult to make a living, and although the reason for this is unknown, there is little doubt that he no longer felt committed to his original calling. This is possibly why he took the decision to leave medicine once and for all and in 1729 records show him being ordained. He held two parishes, first in Stamford and later in Bloomsbury. Although he pursued two very different careers Stukeley maintained a love of history and archaeology. He was particularly fascinated by the early history of the country and became one of the first advocates of heritage conservation. He also became a trustee of the newly created British Museum and wrote extensively on many aspects of history and archaeology. Unfortunately, Stukeley was regarded as being something of a romantic and whilst this appealed to his supporters, including the poet William Blake, his interpretations of the past were often questioned by experts and dismissed as little more than the writings of an enthusiastic amateur. Many of his ideas were later disproved, which meant that towards the end of his life there were a growing number of historians and archaeologists who publicly disowned his work. However, men such as Stukeley are worthy of far more consideration than they are given and serve as a reminder that the past whilst requiring the highest standard of intellectual engagement, must not be judgemental of those it attracts.