Addiction: A Very Short Introduction

Keith Humphreys
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/addiction-a-very-short-introduction-keith-humphreys-2
/
Addiction: A Very Short Introduction
 VERY SHORT INTRODUCTIONS are for anyone wanting a stimulating and
accessible way into a new subject. They are written by experts, and have
been translated into more than 45 different languages.
The series began in 1995, and now covers a wide variety of topics in every
discipline. The VSI library currently contains over 700 volumes—a Very Short
Introduction to everything from Psychology and Philosophy of Science to
American History and Relativity—and continues to grow in every subject
area.

Very Short Introductions available now:

ABOLITIONISM Richard S. Newman

THE ABRAHAMIC RELIGIONS Charles L. Cohen
ACCOUNTING Christopher Nobes
ADDICTION Keith Humphreys
ADOLESCENCE Peter K. Smith
THEODOR W. ADORNO Andrew Bowie
ADVERTISING Winston Fletcher
AERIAL WARFARE Frank Ledwidge
AESTHETICS Bence Nanay
AFRICAN AMERICAN RELIGION Eddie S. Glaude Jr
AFRICAN HISTORY John Parker and Richard Rathbone
AFRICAN POLITICS Ian Taylor
AFRICAN RELIGIONS Jacob K. Olupona
AGEING Nancy A. Pachana
AGNOSTICISM Robin Le Poidevin
AGRICULTURE Paul Brassley and Richard Soffe
ALEXANDER THE GREAT Hugh Bowden
ALGEBRA Peter M. Higgins
AMERICAN BUSINESS HISTORY Walter A. Friedman
AMERICAN CULTURAL HISTORY Eric Avila
AMERICAN FOREIGN RELATIONS Andrew Preston
AMERICAN HISTORY Paul S. Boyer
AMERICAN IMMIGRATION David A. Gerber
AMERICAN INTELLECTUAL HISTORY Jennifer Ratner-Rosenhagen
THE AMERICAN JUDICIAL SYSTEM Charles L. Zelden
AMERICAN LEGAL HISTORY G. Edward White
AMERICAN MILITARY HISTORY Joseph T. Glatthaar
AMERICAN NAVAL HISTORY Craig L. Symonds
AMERICAN POETRY David Caplan
AMERICAN POLITICAL HISTORY Donald Critchlow
AMERICAN POLITICAL PARTIES AND ELECTIONS L. Sandy Maisel
AMERICAN POLITICS Richard M. Valelly
THE AMERICAN PRESIDENCY Charles O. Jones
THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION Robert J. Allison
AMERICAN SLAVERY Heather Andrea Williams
THE AMERICAN SOUTH Charles Reagan Wilson
THE AMERICAN WEST Stephen Aron
AMERICAN WOMEN’S HISTORY Susan Ware
AMPHIBIANS T. S. Kemp
ANAESTHESIA Aidan O’Donnell
ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY Michael Beaney
ANARCHISM Alex Prichard
ANCIENT ASSYRIA Karen Radner
ANCIENT EGYPT Ian Shaw
ANCIENT EGYPTIAN ART AND ARCHITECTURE Christina Riggs
ANCIENT GREECE Paul Cartledge
THE ANCIENT NEAR EAST Amanda H. Podany
ANCIENT PHILOSOPHY Julia Annas
ANCIENT WARFARE Harry Sidebottom
ANGELS David Albert Jones
ANGLICANISM Mark Chapman
THE ANGLO-SAXON AGE John Blair
ANIMAL BEHAVIOUR Tristram D. Wyatt
THE ANIMAL KINGDOM Peter Holland
ANIMAL RIGHTS David DeGrazia
ANSELM Thomas Williams
THE ANTARCTIC Klaus Dodds
ANTHROPOCENE Erle C. Ellis
ANTISEMITISM Steven Beller
ANXIETY Daniel Freeman and Jason Freeman
THE APOCRYPHAL GOSPELS Paul Foster
APPLIED MATHEMATICS Alain Goriely
THOMAS AQUINAS Fergus Kerr
ARBITRATION Thomas Schultz and Thomas Grant
ARCHAEOLOGY Paul Bahn
ARCHITECTURE Andrew Ballantyne
THE ARCTIC Klaus Dodds and Jamie Woodward
HANNAH ARENDT Dana Villa
ARISTOCRACY William Doyle
ARISTOTLE Jonathan Barnes
ART HISTORY Dana Arnold
ART THEORY Cynthia Freeland
ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE Margaret A. Boden
ASIAN AMERICAN HISTORY Madeline Y. Hsu
ASTROBIOLOGY David C. Catling
ASTROPHYSICS James Binney
ATHEISM Julian Baggini
THE ATMOSPHERE Paul I. Palmer
AUGUSTINE Henry Chadwick
JANE AUSTEN Tom Keymer
AUSTRALIA Kenneth Morgan
AUTISM Uta Frith
AUTOBIOGRAPHY Laura Marcus
THE AVANT GARDE David Cottington
THE AZTECS Davíd Carrasco
BABYLONIA Trevor Bryce
BACTERIA Sebastian G. B. Amyes
BANKING John Goddard and John O. S. Wilson
BARTHES Jonathan Culler
THE BEATS David Sterritt
BEAUTY Roger Scruton
LUDWIG VAN BEETHOVEN Mark Evan Bonds
BEHAVIOURAL ECONOMICS Michelle Baddeley
BESTSELLERS John Sutherland
THE BIBLE John Riches
BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY Eric H. Cline
BIG DATA Dawn E. Holmes
BIOCHEMISTRY Mark Lorch
BIOGEOGRAPHY Mark V. Lomolino
BIOGRAPHY Hermione Lee
BIOMETRICS Michael Fairhurst
ELIZABETH BISHOP Jonathan F. S. Post
BLACK HOLES Katherine Blundell
BLASPHEMY Yvonne Sherwood
BLOOD Chris Cooper
THE BLUES Elijah Wald
THE BODY Chris Shilling
NIELS BOHR J. L. Heilbron
THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER Brian Cummings
THE BOOK OF MORMON Terryl Givens
BORDERS Alexander C. Diener and Joshua Hagen
THE BRAIN Michael O’Shea
BRANDING Robert Jones
THE BRICS Andrew F. Cooper
BRITISH CINEMA Charles Barr
THE BRITISH CONSTITUTION Martin Loughlin
THE BRITISH EMPIRE Ashley Jackson
BRITISH POLITICS Tony Wright
BUDDHA Michael Carrithers
BUDDHISM Damien Keown
BUDDHIST ETHICS Damien Keown
BYZANTIUM Peter Sarris
CALVINISM Jon Balserak
ALBERT CAMUS Oliver Gloag
CANADA Donald Wright
CANCER Nicholas James
CAPITALISM James Fulcher
CATHOLICISM Gerald O’Collins
CAUSATION Stephen Mumford and Rani Lill Anjum
THE CELL Terence Allen and Graham Cowling
THE CELTS Barry Cunliffe
CHAOS Leonard Smith
GEOFFREY CHAUCER David Wallace
CHEMISTRY Peter Atkins
CHILD PSYCHOLOGY Usha Goswami
CHILDREN’S LITERATURE Kimberley Reynolds
CHINESE LITERATURE Sabina Knight
CHOICE THEORY Michael Allingham
CHRISTIAN ART Beth Williamson
CHRISTIAN ETHICS D. Stephen Long
CHRISTIANITY Linda Woodhead
CIRCADIAN RHYTHMS Russell Foster and Leon Kreitzman
CITIZENSHIP Richard Bellamy
CITY PLANNING Carl Abbott
CIVIL ENGINEERING David Muir Wood
CLASSICAL LITERATURE William Allan
CLASSICAL MYTHOLOGY Helen Morales
CLASSICS Mary Beard and John Henderson
CLAUSEWITZ Michael Howard
CLIMATE Mark Maslin
CLIMATE CHANGE Mark Maslin
CLINICAL PSYCHOLOGY Susan Llewelyn and Katie Aafjes-van Doorn
COGNITIVE BEHAVIOURAL THERAPY Freda McManus
COGNITIVE NEUROSCIENCE Richard Passingham
THE COLD WAR Robert J. McMahon
COLONIAL AMERICA Alan Taylor
COLONIAL LATIN AMERICAN LITERATURE Rolena Adorno
COMBINATORICS Robin Wilson
COMEDY Matthew Bevis
COMMUNISM Leslie Holmes
COMPARATIVE LITERATURE Ben Hutchinson
COMPETITION AND ANTITRUST LAW Ariel Ezrachi
COMPLEXITY John H. Holland
THE COMPUTER Darrel Ince
COMPUTER SCIENCE Subrata Dasgupta
CONCENTRATION CAMPS Dan Stone
CONDENSED MATTER PHYSICS Ross H. McKenzie
CONFUCIANISM Daniel K. Gardner
THE CONQUISTADORS Matthew Restall and Felipe Fernández-Armesto
CONSCIENCE Paul Strohm
CONSCIOUSNESS Susan Blackmore
CONTEMPORARY ART Julian Stallabrass
CONTEMPORARY FICTION Robert Eaglestone
CONTINENTAL PHILOSOPHY Simon Critchley
COPERNICUS Owen Gingerich
CORAL REEFS Charles Sheppard
CORPORATE SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY Jeremy Moon
CORRUPTION Leslie Holmes
COSMOLOGY Peter Coles
COUNTRY MUSIC Richard Carlin
CREATIVITY Vlad Glăveanu
CRIME FICTION Richard Bradford
CRIMINAL JUSTICE Julian V. Roberts
CRIMINOLOGY Tim Newburn
CRITICAL THEORY Stephen Eric Bronner
THE CRUSADES Christopher Tyerman
CRYPTOGRAPHY Fred Piper and Sean Murphy
CRYSTALLOGRAPHY A. M. Glazer
THE CULTURAL REVOLUTION Richard Curt Kraus
DADA AND SURREALISM David Hopkins
DANTE Peter Hainsworth and David Robey
DARWIN Jonathan Howard
THE DEAD SEA SCROLLS Timothy H. Lim
DECADENCE David Weir
DECOLONIZATION Dane Kennedy
DEMENTIA Kathleen Taylor
DEMOCRACY Bernard Crick
DEMOGRAPHY Sarah Harper
DEPRESSION Jan Scott and Mary Jane Tacchi
DERRIDA Simon Glendinning
DESCARTES Tom Sorell
DESERTS Nick Middleton
DESIGN John Heskett
DEVELOPMENT Ian Goldin
DEVELOPMENTAL BIOLOGY Lewis Wolpert
THE DEVIL Darren Oldridge
DIASPORA Kevin Kenny
CHARLES DICKENS Jenny Hartley
DICTIONARIES Lynda Mugglestone
DINOSAURS David Norman
DIPLOMATIC HISTORY Joseph M. Siracusa
DOCUMENTARY FILM Patricia Aufderheide
DREAMING J. Allan Hobson
DRUGS Les Iversen
DRUIDS Barry Cunliffe
DYNASTY Jeroen Duindam
DYSLEXIA Margaret J. Snowling
EARLY MUSIC Thomas Forrest Kelly
THE EARTH Martin Redfern
EARTH SYSTEM SCIENCE Tim Lenton
ECOLOGY Jaboury Ghazoul
ECONOMICS Partha Dasgupta
EDUCATION Gary Thomas
EGYPTIAN MYTH Geraldine Pinch
EIGHTEENTH‑CENTURY BRITAIN Paul Langford
THE ELEMENTS Philip Ball
EMOTION Dylan Evans
EMPIRE Stephen Howe
EMPLOYMENT LAW David Cabrelli
ENERGY SYSTEMS Nick Jenkins
ENGELS Terrell Carver
ENGINEERING David Blockley
THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE Simon Horobin
ENGLISH LITERATURE Jonathan Bate
THE ENLIGHTENMENT John Robertson
ENTREPRENEURSHIP Paul Westhead and Mike Wright
ENVIRONMENTAL ECONOMICS Stephen Smith
ENVIRONMENTAL ETHICS Robin Attfield
ENVIRONMENTAL LAW Elizabeth Fisher
ENVIRONMENTAL POLITICS Andrew Dobson
ENZYMES Paul Engel
EPICUREANISM Catherine Wilson
EPIDEMIOLOGY Rodolfo Saracci
ETHICS Simon Blackburn
ETHNOMUSICOLOGY Timothy Rice
THE ETRUSCANS Christopher Smith
EUGENICS Philippa Levine
THE EUROPEAN UNION Simon Usherwood and John Pinder
EUROPEAN UNION LAW Anthony Arnull
EVANGELICALISM John G. Stackhouse Jr.
EVIL Luke Russell
EVOLUTION Brian and Deborah Charlesworth
EXISTENTIALISM Thomas Flynn
EXPLORATION Stewart A. Weaver
EXTINCTION Paul B. Wignall
THE EYE Michael Land
FAIRY TALE Marina Warner
FAMILY LAW Jonathan Herring
MICHAEL FARADAY Frank A. J. L. James
FASCISM Kevin Passmore
FASHION Rebecca Arnold
FEDERALISM Mark J. Rozell and Clyde Wilcox
FEMINISM Margaret Walters
FILM Michael Wood
FILM MUSIC Kathryn Kalinak
FILM NOIR James Naremore
FIRE Andrew C. Scott
THE FIRST WORLD WAR Michael Howard
FLUID MECHANICS Eric Lauga
FOLK MUSIC Mark Slobin
FOOD John Krebs
FORENSIC PSYCHOLOGY David Canter
FORENSIC SCIENCE Jim Fraser
FORESTS Jaboury Ghazoul
FOSSILS Keith Thomson
FOUCAULT Gary Gutting
THE FOUNDING FATHERS R. B. Bernstein
FRACTALS Kenneth Falconer
FREE SPEECH Nigel Warburton
FREE WILL Thomas Pink
FREEMASONRY Andreas Önnerfors
FRENCH LITERATURE John D. Lyons
FRENCH PHILOSOPHY Stephen Gaukroger and Knox Peden
THE FRENCH REVOLUTION William Doyle
FREUD Anthony Storr
FUNDAMENTALISM Malise Ruthven
FUNGI Nicholas P. Money
THE FUTURE Jennifer M. Gidley
GALAXIES John Gribbin
GALILEO Stillman Drake
GAME THEORY Ken Binmore
GANDHI Bhikhu Parekh
GARDEN HISTORY Gordon Campbell
GENES Jonathan Slack
GENIUS Andrew Robinson
GENOMICS John Archibald
GEOGRAPHY John Matthews and David Herbert
GEOLOGY Jan Zalasiewicz
GEOMETRY Maciej Dunajski
GEOPHYSICS William Lowrie
GEOPOLITICS Klaus Dodds
GERMAN LITERATURE Nicholas Boyle
GERMAN PHILOSOPHY Andrew Bowie
THE GHETTO Bryan Cheyette
GLACIATION David J. A. Evans
GLOBAL CATASTROPHES Bill McGuire
GLOBAL ECONOMIC HISTORY Robert C. Allen
GLOBAL ISLAM Nile Green
GLOBALIZATION Manfred B. Steger
GOD John Bowker
GÖDEL’S THEOREM A. W. Moore
GOETHE Ritchie Robertson
THE GOTHIC Nick Groom
GOVERNANCE Mark Bevir
GRAVITY Timothy Clifton
THE GREAT DEPRESSION AND THE NEW DEAL Eric Rauchway
HABEAS CORPUS Amanda L. Tyler
HABERMAS James Gordon Finlayson
THE HABSBURG EMPIRE Martyn Rady
HAPPINESS Daniel M. Haybron
THE HARLEM RENAISSANCE Cheryl A. Wall
THE HEBREW BIBLE AS LITERATURE Tod Linafelt
HEGEL Peter Singer
HEIDEGGER Michael Inwood
THE HELLENISTIC AGE Peter Thonemann
HEREDITY John Waller
HERMENEUTICS Jens Zimmermann
HERODOTUS Jennifer T. Roberts
HIEROGLYPHS Penelope Wilson
HINDUISM Kim Knott
HISTORY John H. Arnold
THE HISTORY OF ASTRONOMY Michael Hoskin
THE HISTORY OF CHEMISTRY William H. Brock
THE HISTORY OF CHILDHOOD James Marten
THE HISTORY OF CINEMA Geoffrey Nowell-Smith
THE HISTORY OF COMPUTING Doron Swade
THE HISTORY OF LIFE Michael Benton
THE HISTORY OF MATHEMATICS Jacqueline Stedall
THE HISTORY OF MEDICINE William Bynum
THE HISTORY OF PHYSICS J. L. Heilbron
THE HISTORY OF POLITICAL THOUGHT Richard Whatmore
THE HISTORY OF TIME Leofranc Holford‑Strevens
HIV AND AIDS Alan Whiteside
HOBBES Richard Tuck
HOLLYWOOD Peter Decherney
THE HOLY ROMAN EMPIRE Joachim Whaley
HOME Michael Allen Fox
HOMER Barbara Graziosi
HORMONES Martin Luck
HORROR Darryl Jones
HUMAN ANATOMY Leslie Klenerman
HUMAN EVOLUTION Bernard Wood
HUMAN PHYSIOLOGY Jamie A. Davies
HUMAN RESOURCE MANAGEMENT Adrian Wilkinson
HUMAN RIGHTS Andrew Clapham
HUMANISM Stephen Law
HUME James A. Harris
HUMOUR Noël Carroll
THE ICE AGE Jamie Woodward
IDENTITY Florian Coulmas
IDEOLOGY Michael Freeden
THE IMMUNE SYSTEM Paul Klenerman
INDIAN CINEMA Ashish Rajadhyaksha
INDIAN PHILOSOPHY Sue Hamilton
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION Robert C. Allen
INFECTIOUS DISEASE Marta L. Wayne and Benjamin M. Bolker
INFINITY Ian Stewart
INFORMATION Luciano Floridi
INNOVATION Mark Dodgson and David Gann
INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY Siva Vaidhyanathan
INTELLIGENCE Ian J. Deary
INTERNATIONAL LAW Vaughan Lowe
INTERNATIONAL MIGRATION Khalid Koser
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS Christian Reus-Smit
INTERNATIONAL SECURITY Christopher S. Browning
INSECTS Simon Leather
IRAN Ali M. Ansari
ISLAM Malise Ruthven
ISLAMIC HISTORY Adam Silverstein
ISLAMIC LAW Mashood A. Baderin
ISOTOPES Rob Ellam
ITALIAN LITERATURE Peter Hainsworth and David Robey
HENRY JAMES Susan L. Mizruchi
JESUS Richard Bauckham
JEWISH HISTORY David N. Myers
JEWISH LITERATURE Ilan Stavans
JOURNALISM Ian Hargreaves
JAMES JOYCE Colin MacCabe
JUDAISM Norman Solomon
JUNG Anthony Stevens
KABBALAH Joseph Dan
KAFKA Ritchie Robertson
KANT Roger Scruton
KEYNES Robert Skidelsky
KIERKEGAARD Patrick Gardiner
KNOWLEDGE Jennifer Nagel
THE KORAN Michael Cook
KOREA Michael J. Seth
LAKES Warwick F. Vincent
LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE Ian H. Thompson
LANDSCAPES AND GEOMORPHOLOGY Andrew Goudie and Heather Viles
LANGUAGES Stephen R. Anderson
LATE ANTIQUITY Gillian Clark
LAW Raymond Wacks
THE LAWS OF THERMODYNAMICS Peter Atkins
LEADERSHIP Keith Grint
LEARNING Mark Haselgrove
LEIBNIZ Maria Rosa Antognazza
C. S. LEWIS James Como
LIBERALISM Michael Freeden
LIGHT Ian Walmsley
LINCOLN Allen C. Guelzo
LINGUISTICS Peter Matthews
LITERARY THEORY Jonathan Culler
LOCKE John Dunn
LOGIC Graham Priest
LOVE Ronald de Sousa
MARTIN LUTHER Scott H. Hendrix
MACHIAVELLI Quentin Skinner
MADNESS Andrew Scull
MAGIC Owen Davies
MAGNA CARTA Nicholas Vincent
MAGNETISM Stephen Blundell
MALTHUS Donald Winch
MAMMALS T. S. Kemp
MANAGEMENT John Hendry
NELSON MANDELA Elleke Boehmer
MAO Delia Davin
MARINE BIOLOGY Philip V. Mladenov
MARKETING Kenneth Le Meunier-FitzHugh
THE MARQUIS DE SADE John Phillips
MARTYRDOM Jolyon Mitchell
MARX Peter Singer
MATERIALS Christopher Hall
MATHEMATICAL FINANCE Mark H. A. Davis
MATHEMATICS Timothy Gowers
MATTER Geoff Cottrell
THE MAYA Matthew Restall and Amara Solari
THE MEANING OF LIFE Terry Eagleton
MEASUREMENT David Hand
MEDICAL ETHICS Michael Dunn and Tony Hope
MEDICAL LAW Charles Foster
MEDIEVAL BRITAIN John Gillingham and Ralph A. Griffiths
MEDIEVAL LITERATURE Elaine Treharne
MEDIEVAL PHILOSOPHY John Marenbon
MEMORY Jonathan K. Foster
METAPHYSICS Stephen Mumford
METHODISM William J. Abraham
THE MEXICAN REVOLUTION Alan Knight
MICROBIOLOGY Nicholas P. Money
MICROBIOMES Angela E. Douglas
MICROECONOMICS Avinash Dixit
MICROSCOPY Terence Allen
THE MIDDLE AGES Miri Rubin
MILITARY JUSTICE Eugene R. Fidell
MILITARY STRATEGY Antulio J. Echevarria II
JOHN STUART MILL Gregory Claeys
MINERALS David Vaughan
MIRACLES Yujin Nagasawa
MODERN ARCHITECTURE Adam Sharr
MODERN ART David Cottington
MODERN BRAZIL Anthony W. Pereira
MODERN CHINA Rana Mitter
MODERN DRAMA Kirsten E. Shepherd-Barr
MODERN FRANCE Vanessa R. Schwartz
MODERN INDIA Craig Jeffrey
MODERN IRELAND Senia Pašeta
MODERN ITALY Anna Cento Bull
MODERN JAPAN Christopher Goto-Jones
MODERN LATIN AMERICAN LITERATURE Roberto González Echevarría
MODERN WAR Richard English
MODERNISM Christopher Butler
MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Aysha Divan and Janice A. Royds
MOLECULES Philip Ball
MONASTICISM Stephen J. Davis
THE MONGOLS Morris Rossabi
MONTAIGNE William M. Hamlin
MOONS David A. Rothery
MORMONISM Richard Lyman Bushman
MOUNTAINS Martin F. Price
MUHAMMAD Jonathan A. C. Brown
MULTICULTURALISM Ali Rattansi
MULTILINGUALISM John C. Maher
MUSIC Nicholas Cook
MUSIC AND TECHNOLOGY Mark Katz
MYTH Robert A. Segal
NANOTECHNOLOGY Philip Moriarty
NAPOLEON David A. Bell
THE NAPOLEONIC WARS Mike Rapport
NATIONALISM Steven Grosby
NATIVE AMERICAN LITERATURE Sean Teuton
NAVIGATION Jim Bennett
NAZI GERMANY Jane Caplan
NEGOTIATION Carrie Menkel-Meadow
NEOLIBERALISM Manfred B. Steger and Ravi K. Roy
NETWORKS Guido Caldarelli and Michele Catanzaro
THE NEW TESTAMENT Luke Timothy Johnson
THE NEW TESTAMENT AS LITERATURE Kyle Keefer
NEWTON Robert Iliffe
NIETZSCHE Michael Tanner
NINETEENTH‑CENTURY BRITAIN Christopher Harvie and H. C. G. Matthew
THE NORMAN CONQUEST George Garnett
NORTH AMERICAN INDIANS Theda Perdue and Michael D. Green
NORTHERN IRELAND Marc Mulholland
NOTHING Frank Close
NUCLEAR PHYSICS Frank Close
NUCLEAR POWER Maxwell Irvine
NUCLEAR WEAPONS Joseph M. Siracusa
NUMBER THEORY Robin Wilson
NUMBERS Peter M. Higgins
NUTRITION David A. Bender
OBJECTIVITY Stephen Gaukroger
OCEANS Dorrik Stow
THE OLD TESTAMENT Michael D. Coogan
THE ORCHESTRA D. Kern Holoman
ORGANIC CHEMISTRY Graham Patrick
ORGANIZATIONS Mary Jo Hatch
ORGANIZED CRIME Georgios A. Antonopoulos and Georgios Papanicolaou
ORTHODOX CHRISTIANITY A. Edward Siecienski
OVID Llewelyn Morgan
PAGANISM Owen Davies
PAKISTAN Pippa Virdee
THE PALESTINIAN-ISRAELI CONFLICT Martin Bunton
PANDEMICS Christian W. McMillen
PARTICLE PHYSICS Frank Close
PAUL E. P. Sanders
IVAN PAVLOV Daniel P. Todes
PEACE Oliver P. Richmond
PENTECOSTALISM William K. Kay
PERCEPTION Brian Rogers
THE PERIODIC TABLE Eric R. Scerri
PHILOSOPHICAL METHOD Timothy Williamson
PHILOSOPHY Edward Craig
PHILOSOPHY IN THE ISLAMIC WORLD Peter Adamson
PHILOSOPHY OF BIOLOGY Samir Okasha
PHILOSOPHY OF LAW Raymond Wacks
PHILOSOPHY OF MIND Barbara Gail Montero
PHILOSOPHY OF PHYSICS David Wallace
PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE Samir Okasha
PHILOSOPHY OF RELIGION Tim Bayne
PHOTOGRAPHY Steve Edwards
PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY Peter Atkins
PHYSICS Sidney Perkowitz
PILGRIMAGE Ian Reader
PLAGUE Paul Slack
PLANETARY SYSTEMS Raymond T. Pierrehumbert
PLANETS David A. Rothery
PLANTS Timothy Walker
PLATE TECTONICS Peter Molnar
PLATO Julia Annas
POETRY Bernard O’Donoghue
POLITICAL PHILOSOPHY David Miller
POLITICS Kenneth Minogue
POLYGAMY Sarah M. S. Pearsall
POPULISM Cas Mudde and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser
POSTCOLONIALISM Robert J. C. Young
POSTMODERNISM Christopher Butler
POSTSTRUCTURALISM Catherine Belsey
POVERTY Philip N. Jefferson
PREHISTORY Chris Gosden
PRESOCRATIC PHILOSOPHY Catherine Osborne
PRIVACY Raymond Wacks
PROBABILITY John Haigh
PROGRESSIVISM Walter Nugent
PROHIBITION W. J. Rorabaugh
PROJECTS Andrew Davies
PROTESTANTISM Mark A. Noll
PSYCHIATRY Tom Burns
PSYCHOANALYSIS Daniel Pick
PSYCHOLOGY Gillian Butler and Freda McManus
PSYCHOLOGY OF MUSIC Elizabeth Hellmuth Margulis
PSYCHOPATHY Essi Viding
PSYCHOTHERAPY Tom Burns and Eva Burns-Lundgren
PUBLIC ADMINISTRATION Stella Z. Theodoulou and Ravi K. Roy
PUBLIC HEALTH Virginia Berridge
PURITANISM Francis J. Bremer
THE QUAKERS Pink Dandelion
QUANTUM THEORY John Polkinghorne
RACISM Ali Rattansi
RADIOACTIVITY Claudio Tuniz
RASTAFARI Ennis B. Edmonds
READING Belinda Jack
THE REAGAN REVOLUTION Gil Troy
REALITY Jan Westerhoff
RECONSTRUCTION Allen C. Guelzo
THE REFORMATION Peter Marshall
REFUGEES Gil Loescher
RELATIVITY Russell Stannard
RELIGION Thomas A. Tweed
RELIGION IN AMERICA Timothy Beal
THE RENAISSANCE Jerry Brotton
RENAISSANCE ART Geraldine A. Johnson
RENEWABLE ENERGY Nick Jelley
REPTILES T. S. Kemp
REVOLUTIONS Jack A. Goldstone
RHETORIC Richard Toye
RISK Baruch Fischhoff and John Kadvany
RITUAL Barry Stephenson
RIVERS Nick Middleton
ROBOTICS Alan Winfield
ROCKS Jan Zalasiewicz
ROMAN BRITAIN Peter Salway
THE ROMAN EMPIRE Christopher Kelly
THE ROMAN REPUBLIC David M. Gwynn
ROMANTICISM Michael Ferber
ROUSSEAU Robert Wokler
RUSSELL A. C. Grayling
THE RUSSIAN ECONOMY Richard Connolly
RUSSIAN HISTORY Geoffrey Hosking
RUSSIAN LITERATURE Catriona Kelly
THE RUSSIAN REVOLUTION S. A. Smith
SAINTS Simon Yarrow
SAMURAI Michael Wert
SAVANNAS Peter A. Furley
SCEPTICISM Duncan Pritchard
SCHIZOPHRENIA Chris Frith and Eve Johnstone
SCHOPENHAUER Christopher Janaway
SCIENCE AND RELIGION Thomas Dixon and Adam R. Shapiro
SCIENCE FICTION David Seed
THE SCIENTIFIC REVOLUTION Lawrence M. Principe
SCOTLAND Rab Houston
SECULARISM Andrew Copson
SEXUAL SELECTION Marlene Zuk and Leigh W. Simmons
SEXUALITY Véronique Mottier
WILLIAM SHAKESPEARE Stanley Wells
SHAKESPEARE’S COMEDIES Bart van Es
SHAKESPEARE’S SONNETS AND POEMS Jonathan F. S. Post
SHAKESPEARE’S TRAGEDIES Stanley Wells
GEORGE BERNARD SHAW Christopher Wixson
MARY SHELLEY Charlotte Gordon
THE SHORT STORY Andrew Kahn
SIKHISM Eleanor Nesbitt
SILENT FILM Donna Kornhaber
THE SILK ROAD James A. Millward
SLANG Jonathon Green
SLEEP Steven W. Lockley and Russell G. Foster
SMELL Matthew Cobb
ADAM SMITH Christopher J. Berry
SOCIAL AND CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY John Monaghan and Peter Just
SOCIAL PSYCHOLOGY Richard J. Crisp
SOCIAL WORK Sally Holland and Jonathan Scourfield
SOCIALISM Michael Newman
SOCIOLINGUISTICS John Edwards
SOCIOLOGY Steve Bruce
SOCRATES C. C. W. Taylor
SOFT MATTER Tom McLeish
SOUND Mike Goldsmith
SOUTHEAST ASIA James R. Rush
THE SOVIET UNION Stephen Lovell
THE SPANISH CIVIL WAR Helen Graham
SPANISH LITERATURE Jo Labanyi
THE SPARTANS Andrew J. Bayliss
SPINOZA Roger Scruton
SPIRITUALITY Philip Sheldrake
SPORT Mike Cronin
STARS Andrew King
STATISTICS David J. Hand
STEM CELLS Jonathan Slack
STOICISM Brad Inwood
STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING David Blockley
STUART BRITAIN John Morrill
THE SUN Philip Judge
SUPERCONDUCTIVITY Stephen Blundell
SUPERSTITION Stuart Vyse
SYMMETRY Ian Stewart
SYNAESTHESIA Julia Simner
SYNTHETIC BIOLOGY Jamie A. Davies
SYSTEMS BIOLOGY Eberhard O. Voit
TAXATION Stephen Smith
TEETH Peter S. Ungar
TELESCOPES Geoff Cottrell
TERRORISM Charles Townshend
THEATRE Marvin Carlson
THEOLOGY David F. Ford
THINKING AND REASONING Jonathan St B. T. Evans
THOUGHT Tim Bayne
TIBETAN BUDDHISM Matthew T. Kapstein
TIDES David George Bowers and Emyr Martyn Roberts
TIME Jenann Ismael
TOCQUEVILLE Harvey C. Mansfield
LEO TOLSTOY Liza Knapp
TOPOLOGY Richard Earl
TRAGEDY Adrian Poole
TRANSLATION Matthew Reynolds
THE TREATY OF VERSAILLES Michael S. Neiberg
TRIGONOMETRY Glen Van Brummelen
THE TROJAN WAR Eric H. Cline
TRUST Katherine Hawley
THE TUDORS John Guy
TWENTIETH‑CENTURY BRITAIN Kenneth O. Morgan
TYPOGRAPHY Paul Luna
THE UNITED NATIONS Jussi M. Hanhimäki
UNIVERSITIES AND COLLEGES David Palfreyman and Paul Temple
THE U.S. CIVIL WAR Louis P. Masur
THE U.S. CONGRESS Donald A. Ritchie
THE U.S. CONSTITUTION David J. Bodenhamer
THE U.S. SUPREME COURT Linda Greenhouse
UTILITARIANISM Katarzyna de Lazari-Radek and Peter Singer
UTOPIANISM Lyman Tower Sargent
VETERINARY SCIENCE James Yeates
THE VIKINGS Julian D. Richards
VIOLENCE Philip Dwyer
THE VIRGIN MARY Joan Winn Leith
THE VIRTUES Craig A. Boyd and Kevin Timpe
VIRUSES Dorothy H. Crawford
VOLCANOES Michael J. Branney and Jan Zalasiewicz
VOLTAIRE Nicholas Cronk
WAR AND RELIGION Jolyon Mitchell and Joshua Rey
WAR AND TECHNOLOGY Alex Roland
WATER John Finney
WAVES Mike Goldsmith
WEATHER Storm Dunlop
THE WELFARE STATE David Garland
WITCHCRAFT Malcolm Gaskill
WITTGENSTEIN A. C. Grayling
WORK Stephen Fineman
WORLD MUSIC Philip Bohlman
WORLD MYTHOLOGY David Leeming
THE WORLD TRADE ORGANIZATION Amrita Narlikar
WORLD WAR II Gerhard L. Weinberg
WRITING AND SCRIPT Andrew Robinson
ZIONISM Michael Stanislawski
ÉMILE ZOLA Brian Nelson

Available soon:
VATICAN II Shaun Blanchard & Stephen Bullivant
OBSERVATIONAL ASTRONOMY Geoff Cottrell
MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS Richard Earl
HISTORY OF EMOTIONS Thomas Dixon

For more information visit our website

www.oup.com/vsi/
Keith Humphreys
 ADDICTION
A Very Short Introduction
 Great Clarendon Street, Oxford, OX2 6DP, United Kingdom
Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the
University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing
worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and in
certain other countries
© Keith Humphreys 2023
The moral rights of the author have been asserted
First edition published in 2023
Impression: 1
All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval
system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in
writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by licence or under
terms agreed with the appropriate reprographics rights organization. Enquiries concerning
reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department,
Oxford University Press, at the address above
You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same
condition on any acquirer
Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press
198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America
British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data
Data available
Library of Congress Control Number: 2022943415
ISBN 978–0–19–955723–3
ebook ISBN 978–0–19–256891–5
Printed and bound by
CPI Group (UK) Ltd, Croydon, CR0 4YY
Links to third party websites are provided by Oxford in good faith and for information only.
Oxford disclaims any responsibility for the materials contained in any third party website
referenced in this work.
Contents

Preface: the tragedy and mystery of addiction

Acknowledgments

List of illustrations

1 Understanding the terrain

2 The nature of addiction

3 Causes of addiction

4 Recovery and treatment

5 Cultural and public policy approaches to addiction

6 The future of addiction

References

Further reading

Index
Preface: the tragedy and
mystery of addiction

Imagine hundreds of millions of people in agony. Their health is

failing, they are straining to support themselves financially, they are
acting in ways that violate their deeply held sense of right and
wrong, and they are causing great pain to people whom they love.
This describes the population of people who are addicted to drugs,
and makes their experience tragic, even heartbreaking. Yet if a fairy
godmother appeared and said, “I can take all this pain away by
waving my wand and making all drugs disappear from earth,” most
of the assembled would howl in protest, seize the wand from her
hand, and break it in two. That also describes the population of
people who are addicted to drugs, and makes their experience
mysterious, even maddening.

I have spent the past 35 years trying to understand the tragedy and
to unravel the mystery of addiction. This book is an effort to share
some of the key things I and my colleagues in the addiction field
have learned, as well as to convey the steps that individuals,
families, communities, and policymakers can do to lessen the toll of
addiction on human health, safety, and well-being.
Acknowledgments

I incurred several debts in writing a VSI to Addiction. Professor Sir

John Strang gave valuable advice on what to cover in this slim
volume. Ms Ryelee Vest carefully proofread the entire manuscript. A
sabbatical grant from Stanford University provided essential writing
time. Most importantly, over my career, thousands of people have
shared with me their experience of addiction, without which I could
never have attained the understanding required to produce this
book.
List of illustrations

1. Low income countries have the lowest rates of addiction

OurWorldInData.org/causes-of-death • CC BY. Source: IHME, Global Burden of
Disease (GBD)

2. United Nations data on per capita daily opioid doses show the US and
Canada became extreme outliers

3. Movie actor and future US President Ronald Reagan hawks Chesterfield

cigarettes
From the collection of Stanford University (tobacco.stanford.edu)

4. The Joe Camel tobacco logo was abandoned when advocates argued it
targeted children
From the collection of Stanford University (tobacco.stanford.edu)

5. Farming coca to make cocaine could become a thing of the past if synthetic
drugs proliferate
JOAQUIN SARMIENTO/AFP via Getty Images
Chapter 1
Understanding the terrain

Basic terms about drugs and drug use

As with any other complex topic, some definitions are necessary to
provide a shared basis of understanding. You do not need to grapple
with extensive jargon to understand addiction and to learn from this
book, but the following terms are important to know.

Addictive drug. There’s an old joke that a drug is defined as any

substance that when injected into a laboratory animal results in a
peer-reviewed journal article. It sometimes seems that way, but the
real definition is that a drug is a chemical substance with a specific
molecular structure that when consumed produces a characteristic
physiological effect (e.g., wakefulness, sleepiness, agitation, sexual
arousal). Consumption of drugs can occur via many routes (see Box:
Common methods of consuming drugs).
Common methods of consuming drugs

Swallowing. Alcohol, caffeinated beverages (e.g., coffee, tea), and most

prescribed drugs taken as directed are swallowed by the user. Because such
drugs are subjected to metabolic processes (e.g., stomach acid breaks them
down before they reach the brain) any pharmacologic effects may be
delayed relative to other methods of administration.

Within the mouth. The oral cavity is lined with tissue that can absorb drugs.
One example will be familiar to fans of American baseball: The wad of
tobacco in a player’s cheek or the snuff between the cheek and gum
provides a steady dose of nicotine. In addition to such “buccal” methods,
drugs can also be absorbed sublingually, that is, under the tongue, as is
done for example with some formulations (e.g., sprayed, liquefied, or in a
film) of opioid medications such as buprenorphine.

Snorting. This method involves inhaling drugs into the nasal cavity where
they are rapidly absorbed. Typically, the drug would be in powder form
(e.g., powder cocaine) although this method can also work to a limited
extent with liquefied drugs such as sprayed naloxone.

Inhalation. Many drugs are consumed by inhaling them in a gaseous form.

Most commonly, this is done by heating the drug, often along with other
materials, and the smoke being inhaled into the lung. Because of the large
surface area of the lung and its absorptive qualities, smoked drugs reach
the brain quickly and can thus be highly reinforcing. Tobacco and cannabis
cigarettes are the most prevalent examples of a smoked drug ignited by a
flame (e.g., a match or lighter), but heroin, crack cocaine, and other drugs
also are often smoked. Other ways of inhaling heated nicotine (i.e., e-
cigarettes and “heat not burn” cigarettes) do not involve an open flame, but
are otherwise similar to smoking as a method of administration. Some
people who use drugs inhale products designed for other purposes (e.g.,
glue, paint thinner, gasoline) to attain intoxicating effects.

Injection. Drugs that are manufactured in liquid form or can be converted

to it by users (e.g., through melting a pill or powder) can be injected
directly into a vein. This allows the user to rapidly experience the effects of
a large amount of a drug. For this reason, individuals who become tolerant
to a drug that they have previously taken by swallowing or snorting may
cross over to injection use. Injection use likely carries the highest risk of
overdose, and certainly has the highest risk of being a vector for the
 transmission of infectious diseases such as HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis, and
various strains of hepatitis.

Human beings of course eat food, drink water, and inhale air, all of
which have a particular molecular structure and characteristic
physiologic effects. But substances that all human beings must
consume to survive are not considered drugs.

Neither are all drugs addictive. People do not become addicted to

antibiotics (e.g., penicillin), non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs
(e.g., ibuprofen), or antipyretics (e.g., paracetamol), for example.
The subset of drugs that are addictive produce a range of short-
term, often quite intense effects such as increased happiness,
greater energy, reduced anxiety, and lessened pain. Some addictive
drugs (e.g., cannabis) also cause alterations in consciousness (e.g., a
perception that the pace of time has altered, hearing unusual sounds
or voices, thinking in offbeat ways, seeing things that are not there).
The short-term effects of addictive drugs differ from the effects they
have longer term, which as we will explore can be quite aversive.

When the term drug or addictive drug is mentioned, most people

think of crack cocaine, MDMA (also known as ecstasy), and other
drugs that are universally illegal. But legally prescribed drugs such as
opioids and benzodiazepines are still drugs even though we
commonly call them medicines instead. So too are legal recreational
drugs like the alcohol (ethanol) in a glass of wine and the nicotine in
a combusted or electronic cigarette.

The most widely consumed addictive drugs include ethanol (alcohol),

nicotine (mainly in tobacco), and cannabis. Two other widely used
classes of drugs are opiates and stimulants. Opiates include opium,
morphine, heroin, fentanyl, oxycodone, and hydrocodone. Widely
used stimulants include caffeine (coffee), areca nut (also called betel
nut), methamphetamine, amphetamine, and cocaine.
Hallucinogens such as LSD, peyote, and psilocybin (the psychoactive
component of “magic mushrooms”) represent a distinct class of
drugs from an addiction viewpoint. Although these are certainly
drugs, they do not seem to be particularly addictive. This doesn’t
mean they aren’t ever harmful, only that neither animals nor
humans seem to display the signs of addiction that will be described
later in this chapter. Such drugs therefore fall outside the scope of
this book.

Tolerance. Our bodies adapt to the repeated administration of

addictive drugs in multiple ways, one of which is the development of
tolerance. Tolerance refers to a drug losing its power to induce an
effect at a familiar dose. For example, a person who feels euphoric
and relaxed when consuming 20 mg of oxycodone may find that,
over time, they need 40 mg to generate the same level of euphoria
and relaxation they once felt. And after a period of using 40 mg of
oxycodone, the same pattern may repeat, incentivizing the use of
ever larger doses.

Tolerance occurs across a range of drug effects. The dose of

morphine that eliminated pain from an injury may fail to do so after
weeks or months, resulting in “breakthrough pain.” The slurred
speech and intoxication that followed three pints of beer may not
make themselves known until the sixth pint after years of heavy
drinking.

Tolerance does not necessarily proceed at the same rate across the
effects of the drug. For example, the subjective high from the same
dose of an opioid may lessen after fewer uses than does slowed
breathing. As a result, someone who increases their dose of opioids
to chase the high that has been lost through tolerance may be at
unusually high risk of brain damage or death as breathing slows
dramatically or even stops because they were not equally tolerant to
that effect of the drug.
Tolerance is a natural process within the human brain, and is unique
neither to addiction nor drug use. Consider the delight you would
feel if you came into the office or a classroom and saw to your
surprise that a treat you enjoy, maybe warm chocolate chip cookies
or sweet sticky buns, was on offer. But when it turns out that by
policy a new tray of the same treat will be there every day to greet
you upon arrival, day by day the experience becomes routine and it
no longer excites you as it did the first time. The first versus the
thousandth time you kiss your sweetheart may be a similar contrast
as you acquire tolerance to that reward. So it is with addictive drugs.

Tolerance can also be lost. A person who doesn’t use a drug for an
extended period will usually find that lower doses have more potent
effects than they used to. Some people who are addicted to drugs
use this as a conscious strategy, for example by attending a
methadone maintenance clinic for a year in the hopes of lowering
the amount of heroin they need to get high. Loss of tolerance can
also create significant risk. For example, after a period of
incarceration during which an individual cannot use drugs, a person
may consume their “usual dose” again upon release and find that
they lose all inhibitions and do something violent (e.g., with alcohol),
or have a health crisis when they pass out suddenly or stop
breathing (e.g., with opioids).

Dependence and withdrawal. Just as repeated use of an addictive

drug can over time induce tolerance, it can also produce a related
but distinct adaptation in the body known as dependence.
Dependence means that in the absence of the drug, the person
begins to experience withdrawal symptoms which are generally the
opposite of the effects of the drug. To cite a common, less severe
example, if you regularly drink several cups of coffee at breakfast, a
morning without it may leave you feeling unusually sleepy and
irritable or perhaps even give you a headache. More aversive
examples are that withdrawal from benzodiazepines may be
experienced as extreme anxiety, and withdrawal from opioids as
agitation, diarrhea, sweats and shakes, sleeplessness, and
formication (the disturbing sensation that bugs are crawling under
one’s skin). Withdrawal from alcohol can involve “delirium tremens”
characterized by seizures, high fever, mental confusion, and
hallucinations, as well as carrying a risk of death. However, in most
cases withdrawal from even heavy drinking, while unpleasant, is less
dramatic and dangerous.

Withdrawal is time limited, but some individuals will find it

sufficiently unpleasant that they decide to take their drug again,
thereby ending the withdrawal symptoms but maintaining their
dependence. At one time it was thought that the desire to relieve
withdrawal symptoms was the primary cause of relapse. But careful
research showed that many addicted people return to substance use
long after withdrawal symptoms have faded.

In popular language, people will sometimes make a distinction

between “psychological dependence” and “physical dependence” on
drugs (e.g., cannabis). But because what we experience as
psychological dependence derives from physical structures in the
brain, this distinction is scientifically meaningless.

“Overdose.” This term is in scare quotes to reflect its deceptive

nature. In common parlance as well as sometimes in medicine, the
term overdose is used to refer to acute and dangerous effects of
addictive drugs. But a more accurate term is “poisoning.” The
distinction matters because many opioid “overdoses” in fact involve
people taking their usual dose or indeed even a lower than normal
dose. The same dose can induce poisoning for many reasons, such
as loss of ability to metabolize the drug due to age, the presence of
another condition that weakens the person (e.g., flu, exhaustion), or
the presence of another drug in the body that produces a dangerous
drug‒drug interaction. Not acknowledging this can provide a false
sense of security, for example that as long as you use the same dose
of heroin each day, you will never overdose. But in truth people die
every day from taking their usual dose, because heroin at all doses
carries a risk of poisoning.

Harm. The term harm is used in the addiction field very much the
way “damage” is used outside of it. It refers to the negative
consequences of an individual’s drug use. These can be
consequences for the individual (e.g., waking up in acute withdrawal
each day) or for other people (e.g., the employer who loses business
because an addicted employee is chronically absent from work).
Harms can result from biology (e.g., overdose) or from a social
response (e.g., a spouse initiates divorce, a policeman arrests the
person for being drunk and disorderly). Importantly, harm exists
whether or not the addicted person is aware of it (e.g., undiagnosed
liver disease, the loss of respect of one’s children, anxiety in one’s
loved ones). Many people whose addiction damages other people
will claim “I am only hurting myself” and genuinely believe this to be
true.

Positive and negative reinforcement. Behavioral psychology as

formulated by giants like B. F. Skinner is often fairly criticized for
oversimplifying human experience. Yet there is still enormous
explanatory power in the principle of operant conditioning, namely
that the reason human beings do many of the things they do is that
they have learned that their behavior produces a desired result. For
example, if when you hug your young child your child warmly hugs
you back, or laughs and smiles, or says “I love you,” you are more
likely to hug your child the next day than you are once they are
teenagers and they are more likely to respond by stiffening up,
protesting that they are too old for hugs, or rolling their eyes.

In the case of drugs, the principle of operant conditioning implies

that many people use them because they find the effects of drugs
enjoyable. “Enjoyable” is subjective and varies across people, for
example one person might find an alteration in consciousness
exciting and another person might find it upsetting. But whatever
the nature of the specific effect, if it increases the person’s likelihood
of using the drug again, it is called “reinforcement.”

Relative to other forms of reinforcement, that produced by addictive

drugs can be extremely powerful. This is in part due to the intensity
of reinforcement but also the speed. It takes only a matter of
seconds for inhaled cigarette smoke to send nicotine through the
lungs, through the blood, and into the brain. The effects of injecting
drugs like heroin are also rapid. Human beings are more attuned to
immediate rewards than distant ones, and people who are addicted
even more so: The immediate pleasure of a smoke right now drives
many people’s behavior more than avoiding lung cancer that will
take decades to develop. The preface of this book pointed out that
even people whose lives are being destroyed by addiction still often
want drugs, and the intensity and speed of the reinforcement drugs
provide is the reason why.

Reinforcement can be positive or negative. Positive reinforcement

“adds something” desirable in response to a behavior. For drug use,
the burst of energy from using methamphetamine, the mental acuity
from consuming nicotine, or the happiness from using opioids, are
examples. Quite understandably, whether people are addicted or
not, these experiences increase the likelihood of future drug use.

Negative reinforcement “subtracts something” undesirable in

response to a behavior. In the case of drugs, this might be the
whisky which “takes the edge off” after a hard day, the
benzodiazepine which ends a panic attack, or the opioid which
soothes the pain from an injury. The legendary author Edgar Allan
Poe, who struggled for years with drug use, described negative
reinforcement vividly:

I have absolutely no pleasure in the stimulants in which I sometimes so

madly indulge. It has not been in the pursuit of pleasure that I have periled
life and reputation and reason. It has been the desperate attempt to escape
 from torturing memories, from a sense of insupportable loneliness and a
dread of some strange impending doom.

Positive and negative reinforcement can motivate use of the same

drug at different points. The expression “the hair of the dog that bit
you” refers to someone addressing a hangover by having a drink in
the morning. The drinking of the night before was motivated by
positive reinforcement—fun, disinhibition, sociability—but the hair of
the dog has the different purpose of reducing the misery of a
hangover.

When someone regularly uses an addictive drug for many months or

years, they can shift from seeking positive reinforcement to desiring
negative reinforcement. For example, they can become tolerant to
the rewards of their drug use, and their dependence means they go
into withdrawal without the drug. The rock and roll singer Cherie
Currie vividly described how drug taking eventually felt:

Even when I took the drugs I realized that this just wasn’t fun anymore. The
drugs had become a part of my routine. Something to wake me up.
Something to help me sleep. Something to calm my nerves. There was a
time when I was able to wake up, go to sleep, and have fun without a pill or
a line to help me function. These days it felt like I might have a nervous
breakdown if I didn’t have them.

Addiction. Having defined some basic terms associated with drug

use, we come to the most difficult definition of all: what is addiction,
the subject of this book? Let’s start with the simplest case, which is
how scientists define it in animals.

Among the most creative and important studies ever done in the
addiction field were conducted by James Olds and Peter Milner in the
1950s. Working at McGill University in Canada, these pioneering
neuroscientists showed that rats given targeted electronic brain
stimulation in response to a behavior (e.g., pressing a lever in their
cage) would aggressively pursue such stimulation even though it
was not essential for survival in preference to activities that are,
such as consuming food and water. Subsequent researchers showed
that similar behavior could be induced by injecting rats with drugs
such as cocaine. Once they had been dosed repeatedly, rats would
endure significant pain to keep using drugs (e.g., run across an
electrified cage to gain access) and consume cocaine in preference
to nutritious food even when they were hungry. Addicted rats will
also work very hard (e.g., press a lever 2,000 times an hour) to
obtain drugs even though it harms them, that is, they burn
enormous calories trying to get drugs that have no nutritive value.

In animal research, addiction is defined by these directly observable

phenomena: an animal is considered addicted to a drug when it
repeatedly endures negative consequences—up to and including
death—in its repeated efforts to use that drug.

Matters become more complex when defining addiction in humans.

In humans, other data points enter the equation, specifically the
ability of people to articulate their own experience. These include
reporting things like “I really planned to stop after two shots of
vodka, but ended up drinking the whole bottle” and “I find myself
thinking about heroin all day long such that I can’t focus on anything
else” and “I know that my cocaine use is wrecking my marriage, but
I keep using it anyway.” Addiction in humans also includes choosing
not to do other behaviors, for example participating in school, having
a job, volunteering in a community (none of this is relevant to lab
rats because there is not exactly much to do in a cage).

Addiction in humans includes directly observable phenomena but is

not reducible to them. For example, people who are addicted
respond to drugs differently from other rewards in ways that can be
seen on brain scans. But none of these studies allows a doctor or
scientist to point at a brain region with a particular signature and say
“There, that is the addiction” as one might say “There, that is the
cancerous tumor” on an X-ray or ultrasound, or “You are pregnant”
or “You have anemia” using a tested fluid sample. Neither can we
use some count of behavior to define a person as addicted, for
example saying that anyone who consumes more than X drinks of
alcohol, Y shots of heroin, or Z snorts of cocaine must be addicted.

To understand how science and medicine handle situations like this,

imagine you are walking through the forest and you see a cluster of
flowers growing. You can observe each of their petals, leaves, and
stems, but you can’t see their roots, so you don’t know if they are all
coming from one source (e.g., a single bulb, or a single nutrient in
the soil) or whether it is just a coincidence that this batch of flowers
grow together. You therefore have to make a guess, or what
scientists would call a hypothesis, about what you can’t see.

Addiction in humans is a hypothesis that a group of things we can

observe have an underlying connection, much as there might be a
connection under the soil between a group of flowers we can
observe above ground. The most important of those observables,
just as in animals, is the repeated use of addictive drugs in the face
of harm. It also includes people reporting on experiences such as
having their “mental real estate” consumed by drug use,
experiencing struggles with control over their use, consuming more
than intended (e.g., “I’ll just do one line of cocaine” turning into a
weekend long binge), and experiencing dependence, tolerance, and
withdrawal. Individually none of these things is addiction, but to
speak of addiction is to believe they constitute a syndrome.
Syndrome literally means “running together.” To say that all these
observables are a syndrome is to hypothesize that they run together
for an underlying reason, which we are calling addiction.

It’s useful to revisit the terms laid out in the prior section as they
relate to addiction. Tolerance, dependence, and withdrawal are
experienced by almost all people who are addicted, but they are not
in themselves addiction. You may find that a single glass of wine
doesn’t reduce anxiety the way it used to because you have become
tolerant to the effects of alcohol, but that doesn’t necessarily mean
that you are experiencing harm or that you struggle to control your
drinking. Dependence is often falsely equated with addiction, and
this was not helped by medical nomenclature in the past using them
interchangeably. But many people who take opioids for pain for
weeks or longer will experience withdrawal when they quit yet not
go on to use opioids in an addictive fashion. Instead the withdrawal
fades with time and they do not use opioids any more.

Not all harmful substance use is addiction either. Someone who

hardly ever drinks can get intoxicated at the office holiday party and
then get a ticket for driving erratically on the way home, but this
doesn’t mean they are addicted to alcohol. Indeed, even someone
who engages in harmful substance use on multiple occasions is not
necessarily addicted. The latest editions of the International
Classification of Diseases (ICD) and Diagnostic and Statistical Manual
of Mental Disorders (DSM) recognize this by allowing clinicians to
record harmful substance use that does not rise to the level of
addiction, even though neither uses this term. Most people whom
the ICD deems as “substance dependent” would be considered
addicted as would most people whom the DSM diagnoses as being
at the “severe” end of what it calls “substance use disorder.”

At the same time, harm is essential to the definition of addiction. We

speak colloquially of “being addicted to” many activities that we
engage in repeatedly, whether it’s listening to jazz music, shopping
for handbags, checking our email, collecting rare coins, or playing a
particular video game. But simply engaging in a behavior much more
than other people and thinking about it often is not inherently proof
of an addiction. Unless the behavior is genuinely causing harm, for
example a person bankrupts themselves buying handbags or stops
eating and sleeping and showing up for work in order to play a video
game, there is no reason to invoke addiction as an explanation.
Chapter 2
The nature of addiction

The first chapter defined addiction as a syndrome—is it also a

disease? This is a much debated issue about which there is more heat
than light. A key reason for this is that the word disease is used in
markedly different ways by different people.

The founders of Alcoholics Anonymous and the 12-step movement it

spawned call addiction a disease. But they don’t mean disease in a
biomedical sense, defining it instead as something rooted in a
person’s character (e.g., self-centeredness) and having physical,
psychological, and spiritual components. From the point of view of
the 12-step disease model, recovery requires cessation of substance
use but also more than that, namely reconstruction of moral
character coupled with spiritual growth.

A different disease model, propagated mainly by the US National

Institutes on Health, is that addiction is a “brain disease,” specifically
that repeated consumption of addictive drugs alters brain structure,
pathways, and functioning in adverse ways. This disease model
emphatically rules out considerations of moral character, being
entirely biological. The brain disease model maintains that repeated
consumption of drugs can cause neural adaptations that could be
thought of as a form of deeply maladaptive learning. Behaviors
focused on obtaining and using drugs become entrenched through
reinforcement. The neurotransmitter-based motivational system of
the brain becomes distorted such that natural rewards become
increasingly less appealing relative to drugs. The part of the brain
that normally helps us restrain our impulses functions less well. To
the addicted person, this can feel as if the gas pedal is sticking to the
floor and the brakes are failing at the same time.

There is also evidence that other parts of the brain change such that
the person’s “emotional set point” moves downward, creating a sense
of pervasive unease. This makes long-term drug use as much about
relief from negative feelings and “trying to get back to where I
started” as it is about attaining an elevated mood state. At the risk of
oversimplifying, imagine that our mood could be judged on a 1‒10
scale at any given moment with 10 being the most wonderful and 1
the most miserable. An addicted person who once woke up with a
mood score of 5 each day and used drugs to reach a score of 10 may
start waking up at 1 and need drugs just to return to the 5 that was
once their set point.

Yet another framing of addiction is as a bad habit, that is, that a

person is repeatedly engaging in activity that damages their health,
much as does overeating which leads to obesity. This model assumes
that like other well-entrenched behaviors, addictive behavior is hard
to change. Individuals embracing this viewpoint usually don’t
explicitly describe addiction as a disease, being more likely to
describe it as a chronic health problem, complex behavioral disorder,
or a behavioral health problem.

Although people who describe addiction in terms of behavior,

learning, and environmental responses tend to reject the “brain
disease” model as too reductionist, too American, or both, this does
not mean they think the brain is irrelevant. After all, the brain is
where memories of learned associations are stored and also clearly
affects human behavior. To wit, the Scottish naval physician Thomas
Trotter, who in 1804 wrote the first English-language book on alcohol
addiction and its treatment, emphasized the role of habit in the
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
but the description given of the field in which the tournament was
held, corresponds, in a most minute manner, with the “Tournament
Field,” still so called, at the neighbouring village of Smisby, and has
for ages been identified with that famous “Passage of Arms.” Eight
miles south-east of Repton this very interesting “habitation among
the ash trees” is situated.
The first authentic mention we have of it is about the year 1066,
when William the Conqueror granted the Manor to Hugh de
Grentemaisnel, one of his most valiant captains at the battle of
Hastings. In Domesday Book we read of its having a priest and
church. Soon afterwards it fell into the hands of Robert de Beaumeis,
another Norman, whose successor, Philip, granted “the church of St.
Helen of Ashby, with the church of Blackfordby,” &c., &c., to the
Abbey of Lilleshall, Salop. Philip de Beaumeis, having no son to
succeed him, left his estates to his daughter Adeliza, who married
Alan la Zouche, a descendant of the Earls of Brittany. Alan settled at
Ashby, and added the family name to it, to distinguish it from the
other towns of that name. Alan was succeeded by his son Roger,
who was succeeded by his son Alan, the last of the real Zouches, in
the male line, who held the Manor of Ashby, he granted it to Sir
William Mortimer, a distant relative, who assumed the name, and
passed it on to his son Alan, who fought at the battle of Creçy, 1346,
and died in that year, he was succeeded by his son Hugh, who died
in 1399, leaving no heir, with him the name, finally, became extinct.
 Plate 16.

Ashby Castle. (Page 92.)

Staunton Harold. (Page 135.)

 The property was held by Sir Hugh Burnett for about twenty years,
when James Butler, Earl of Ormond (a Lancastrian noble), by some
means or other, obtained possession of the land, he was executed at
Newcastle after the battle of Towton Moor in 1461. In that year
Edward, Duke of York, became King, and rewarded his partisans
with titles and grants of land. Among them was Sir William Hastings,
whom he created Baron Hastings of Ashby, &c., Steward of
Leicester, and ambassador, with the Earl of Warwick, to treat for
peace with Louis XI., King of France, who gave him a pension of
2000 crowns per annum. The first payment was made in gold, which
Lord Hastings is said to have received with these words, “Put it here
into my sleeve; for other testimonial (receipt) you shall get none: no
man shall say that King Edward’s Lord Chamberlain hath been
pensioner to the French King.” This may be the origin of the crest of
the Hastings’ family, a maunch or sleeve. King Edward also gave
him “licence to enclose and impark 3000 acres of land and wood at
Ashby-de-la-Zouch,” and to erect and fortify houses, &c., there and
elsewhere. In the year 1474 he built Ashby Castle, nine years later
the Protector (Richard, Duke of Gloucester) accused him of high
treason, and, without trial, had him beheaded on a log of wood on
Tower Green. His remains were interred in Windsor Castle, where a
splendid monument was erected to his memory.
As we are not writing a history of the Hastings family, we must
confine ourselves to those members of that family connected with
the history of the place, which for two centuries centred round its
castle and church. Ashby Castle was, as we have seen, built by the
first Lord Hastings in 1474. It stands on the south side of the town.
Judging by its ruins, it must have been indeed a stately pile. Entering
from the west we see the remains of the kitchen, with its fire-places,
&c.; it had a groined roof, over which were rooms, with another
storey over them, access to these was obtained by a spiral staircase
in the north-east corner of the kitchen. The west front of this block
has been destroyed, so nothing can be written about its chief
entrance, its height is about seventy feet, the dimensions of the
kitchen are fifty feet long, by twenty-seven broad, and thirty-seven
feet high.
 In the kitchen are two doorways leading into the “servants hall,”
from this two doorways lead into the Great Hall, and from this
admission was obtained to a “drawing room.” At the end of this room,
a little to the south, is the chapel, lit by four windows, on either side,
and an east window. At the west end, over the west door, is a gallery,
to which a spiral staircase leads. Adjoining the east end, to the south
of it, were rooms for the chaplain. On the south is a courtyard formed
by the chapel, chaplain’s rooms, a thick wall, and the Great Tower.
This tower must have been an imposing building of, at least, four
storeys, with cellar, kitchen, dining hall, drawing room, and sleeping
apartments. Its southern half is destroyed, but what is left on the
north side—turrets, windows, fire-place, armorial bearings, &c.,
prove how richly the fabric was sculptured over. Very probably there
was a wall from the Great Tower on its west side, like that on its east
side, which met a wall built out from the kitchen. The ground plan of
the Castle would form a parallelogram with kitchen, servants’ hall,
great hall, drawing room, and chapel on the north side, chaplain’s
room at the east end, Great Tower, with walls on the south side, and
a wall and kitchen at the west end. A subterraneous passage
connects the kitchen with the Great Tower.
The chief historical events connected with the Castle are the visit
of Mary, Queen of Scots, in November of the year 1569. She was on
her way from Tutbury to Coventry. Anne, wife of James I., and Prince
Henry were entertained at the Castle in June, 1603, and King James
himself paid the Earl a visit in the year 1617. The expenses of this
visit were so great, the Earl’s income became seriously diminished,
as one of his descendants, Lady Flora, daughter of the 1st Marquis
of Hastings wrote, a propos of the visit,

The bells did ring,

The gracious King
Enjoyed his visit much;
And we’ve been poor
Ere since that hour
At Ashby-de-la-Zouch.
 Again in May, 1645, another Stuart was a guest at Ashby. Charles
I., flushed with the success of his army at Leicester, spent a short
time at the Castle. Fifteen days later, June 14th, he came again, this
time a fugitive from the fatal and final battle of Naseby Field. The
Royalist garrison yielded Leicester, and marched out, the Governor
Hastings (Lord Loughborough) to Ashby, the officers and men to
Lichfield. For months the Parliamentary army, under Sir Thomas
Fairfax, beseiged the town and castle, which held out bravely for the
Royal cause. On the 28th February, 1646, articles of agreement
were drawn up, and signed by Lord Loughborough, and Colonel
Needham. The articles consisted of eleven “items.” The officers and
soldiers were “to march away to Bridgenorth or Worcester, with their
horses, arms, and ammunition, bag, and baggage, trumpets
sounding, drums beating, colours flying,” &c., or they might “lay
down their arms, and have protection to live at home if they please,”
“and the works and fortifications of the town and garrison should be
sleighted,” “after which the sequestrations of Colonel General
Hastings, the Earl of Huntingdon, should be taken off,” or “the
Colonel General, with the said gentlemen, could go to Hull or Bristol
to have a ship provided to transport them to France or Holland,
whither they please.” In 1648 the “sleighting” of the Castle was
performed, only too well, by one William Bainbrigg, of Lockington, in
the county of Leicester. On the north side of the Castle was a green,
on the south a garden, a wall, still existing, surrounded it with towers
of brick, with stone facings, used as summer-houses, or “look outs.”
On the east of the Castle is a triangular tower, triangular in shape,
called the “Mount House,” it is said to be connected with the kitchen
by a subterraneous passage. The “Manor House” on the north-east
side, occupies the site of a suite of apartments made to
accommodate King James I. in the year 1617.
Ashby Church, dedicated to St. Helen, occupies the site of an
earlier building, probably Norman. During the fourteenth and fifteenth
centuries it was rebuilt, and consisted of chancel, nave, north and
south aisles, with tower at the west end. During the last twenty-three
years nearly £16,000. have been spent in enlarging and restoring it.
Now it consists of nave with two aisles on its north and south sides,
all the galleries have been removed, and the old pews have been
replaced by well-designed oak seats. The choir stalls are placed at
the east end of the nave, leaving the chancel unoccupied. Over the
altar there is a fine reredos of oak, ascribed to Grinling Gibbons. On
the south side of the chancel is the mortuary chapel of the
Huntingdon family. A most magnificent tomb of Francis, 2nd Earl of
Huntingdon, and his wife Katherine, occupies the centre of it. Every
detail of it is well worth a very close inspection. There are also many
mural tablets in the chapel.
Within a sculptured recess in the north wall of the church is a finely
executed figure of a pilgrim. Lying on his back, the head rests on a
cushion, just above the right shoulder a portion of a pilgrim’s hat with
scallop-shell is seen. Round the shoulders, and over the breast, is
the collar of SS. The figure is clothed with a long cloak, the feet,
which rest on a dog, are shod with laced boots with pointed toes.
Across the body is a pilgrim’s staff, clasped by the left fore-arm, the
hands meet over the breast, pressed together in the attitude of
prayer, his scrip, ornamented with scallop-shells, is suspended,
diagonally, from his right shoulder. The statue is supposed to be a
Hastings, at least the family claim it, and have had their badge—the
maunch—sculptured on the wall of the recess. Among other
monuments in the church are those to Robert Mundy and his two
wives, a very curious one to Mrs. Margery Wright with high-crowned
hat, ruffles and ermine muff! and many modern ones. The most
curious relic of mediæval days is an old finger pillory, formerly used
for the punishment of disorderly-behaved persons in church. It is in
front of the screen which separates the nave from the tower. The
windows of the church are nearly all of stained glass, and illustrate
scenes in the life of our Lord.
The town of Ashby is well known for its baths. In the year 1822
they were opened, but the great expectations of converting the town
into a fashionable health resort have not been realized. The water is
not found at Ashby, but is pumped from deep coal pits at Moira,
some three miles distant, and conveyed to the baths in tanks
specially constructed for that purpose.
Ashby received quite an unusual class of visitors in the year 1804.
During the prolonged wars between England and France many
thousands of prisoners were landed on our shores. According to Sir
Archibald Alison there were no less than 50,000 French prisoners in
Great Britain. For the accommodation of “the rank and file” such
places as Dartmoor prison were erected, but the officers were
quartered in different towns. On Friday, September 26th, 1804, the
first detachment, consisting of forty-two officers, arrived in Ashby,
other detachments followed, till about two hundred found lodgings
there, among them were officers of the army and navy, and about
thirty others described as merchants. They lived on excellent terms
with the good people of Ashby for ten years, they were allowed
liberty to walk a mile in any direction out of the town. Some escaped,
and some were exchanged for English officers imprisoned in France.
Canon Denton, Vicar of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, has written a most
interesting account of its castle, and this French occupation in
“Bygone Leicestershire.” He obtained the information about the
latter, from the lips of one of his parishioners (Mrs. Whyman), who
lived at the time, and saw them. He also had access to a diary kept
by an Ashby physician (Dr. Kirkland). The church registers contain
entries of marriages contracted between the officers and residents,
also entries of baptisms and burials, which, as the Canon writes,
“show, among other things, that the prisoners of war, who were
quartered at Ashby, did not allow national prejudices to prevent them
forming the closest ties with the inhabitants of the place of their
captivity.”
Little more remains to be written about this interesting town. Its
Grammar School, founded in 1567 by the Earl of Huntingdon and
others, augmented about thirty years after its foundation, by an
inhabitant who is said to have lost his way, and was guided to his
home by the sound of the church bell. In gratitude for this he
conveyed to the trustees of the school certain property on condition
that the bells “should be rung for a quarter of an hour at four o’clock
in the morning.” This custom was kept up till 1807, when it was
discontinued. The property is still known as the “Day Bell Houses.”
One of the Headmasters was Dr. Samuel Shaw, son of Thomas
Shaw, of Brook End, Repton, blacksmith, and was at Repton School
under Dr. Ullock. At the age of 15 Samuel Shaw was admitted as a
sizar at St. John’s College, Cambridge. In 1658 he was Rector of
Long Whatton, ejected in 1661, and was elected Headmaster of
Ashby Grammar School in 1668.

Plate 17.

Barrow-on-Trent Church. (Page 99.)

 Swarkeston House. (Page 101.)

On Thursday, July 24th, 1879, a memorial cross, in design like

Queen Eleanor’s cross at Northampton, was unveiled. It bears the
following inscription, written by the late Earl of Beaconsfield: “In
memory of Edith Maud Countess of Loudoun in her own right,
Baroness Botreux, Hungerford, De Moleyns and Hastings, who
sprung from an illustrious ancestry herself possessed their noblest
qualities, the people of Ashby-de-la-Zouch and the neighbourhood
have raised this cross as a tribute of admiration and of love.” The
cross was designed by the late Sir Gilbert Scott, R.A., and executed
by Messrs. Farmer and Brindley at a cost of £4,500.

BARROW, SWARKESTON, AND STANTON-BY-

BRIDGE.
One of our pleasantest walks from Repton is to Barrow, down
Brook End, up Monsel Lane, past the (Canons’) Meadow Farm, and,
by a field path to the left, to the river Trent, over which there is a
ferry, to Twyford village. After passing through Twyford, turn to the
right along the road, or by a field path, and the picturesque old
village of Barrow will soon be reached. Barrow, most probably,
derived its name from a barrow within the parish, which parish
includes the villages of Arleston, Sinfin, Stenson and Twyford. Of
these villages little can be written, Arleston has some ancient
buildings and ruins which belonged to the preceptory of the Knights
Templars or Hospitallers. Sinfin is noted only for its moor, on which
the Derby races were formerly run. In the year 1804, it was enclosed
by Act of Parliament, and divided among the adjoining townships.
Stenson and Twyford were manors belonging to the Ferrars at the
time of the Domesday Survey, later on they passed to the Curzons,
Findernes, and Harpurs.
The church at Twyford, dedicated to St. Andrew, is a chapelry of,
and held by, the Vicars of Barrow. A Norman arch divides the nave
from the chancel, the rest of the church is of the Decorated period. It
has a tower terminated by an octagonal spire. There are three bells,
and a few mural monuments to the Harpur, Vernon, and Bristowe
families.
Barrow-on-Trent, as it is usually called, dates back to Norman
days, when it had a priest and a church. One portion of the manor
formed part of the endowment of the bishopric of Carlisle, the other,
and proper manor, including the church, belonged to the ancient
family of Bakepuz, one of whom, Robert de Bakepuz, gave the
church to the Priory of St. John of Jerusalem, Knights Templars, or
Hospitallers, who had a preceptory, as we have seen, at Arleston in
the parish of Barrow. For a full and interesting account of the
connection between Barrow and the Knights, see “Cox’s Churches of
Derbyshire,” Vol. IV., pp. 11-19.
When the Order was dissolved in the reign of Henry VIII., the
manor and advowson of the vicarage were granted to the family of
Beaumont, and remained with them till 1638, since that time the
advowson has very frequently changed hands, by sale, or otherwise.
In 1638 Daniel Shelmerdine (an O.R.) was chosen and elected by
the parishioners, and held the living till he was ejected in 1662. The
church, dedicated to St. Wilfred, consists of nave, chancel, north and
south aisles, south porch, and tower at the west end. There are now
no remains of the Norman church. During the reign of Henry III.
(1216-1272), the church was probably rebuilt, and again, in the
Decorated and Perpendicular periods, alterations and additions were
made. There are monuments in memory of the Bothes, Beaumonts,
and Sales.

SWARKESTON.

At the time of the Domesday Survey, Swarkeston (Suerchestune

or Sorchestun) was divided between the King and Henry de Ferrers.
In the reign of Edward I. it belonged to John de Beke, or Beck, and
Robert de Holland. Joan, wife of John de Beck, left it to her son and
heir. In the fourteenth century the manor and advowson was
purchased by the Rollestons, of Rolleston, in Staffordshire, with
whom they remained till about the middle of the sixteenth century
when the manor passed into the family of the Finderns. Jane
Findern, daughter and heiress of George Findern, conveyed it, by
marriage, to Richard Harpur, who built a mansion at Swarkeston.
This mansion was fortified, and the bridge defended by earth-works,
for the King, by Colonel Hastings in 1642. In January, 1643, Sir John
Gell marched against it with Sir George Gresley’s troops, the house
was abandoned on their approach, but the defenders of the bridge
only yielded after a stubborn defence.
Swarkeston Bridge is the most famous one in Derbyshire, and
from end to end measures 1304 yards. The modern part of the
bridge, over the river Trent, is about 138 yards, the remainder forms
a raised causeway, about eleven or twelve feet wide, with arches,
here and there, so that the flood water can escape. The greater part
of the bridge is in the parish of Stanton-by-Bridge. There is a legend
that the old bridge was erected at the sole cost of two maiden
sisters, who lost their lovers when attempting to ford the swollen
waters, to pay a visit to their betrothed ones. It is also said that the
ladies spent the whole of their fortunes on the bridge, and lived a life
of penury ever afterwards.
The earliest mention of the bridge, discovered by the Rev. Charles
Kerry, editor of the Derbyshire Archæological Journal, is in the
Hundred Rolls, and is as follows: “Inquisition held at Derby on the
Feast of S. Hilary, in the Church of S. James, anno 3 Edward I. (Oct.
1, a.d. 1275). The jury reported that the merchants of Melbourne
passing over the bridge had for three years withheld passage money
and tolls, unjustly and without warrant, to the prejudice of our lord the
King and the borough of Derby.”
“The Patent Rolls give three pontages for Swarkeston; viz.:—2nd
Pat., 18 Ed. II., m. 31.; 1st Pat., 12 Ed. III., m. 26. This latter was
granted to the men of Swarkeston for four years; the collectors of the
bridge tolls being Hugo de Calke, and John the son of Adam. Given
at Westminster, March 1st, 1338. The 3rd will be found in 3rd Pat.,
20 Ed. III., which refers to the ruinous state of the bridge, and
appoints John the son of Adam de Melbourne, senior, and John the
son of Adam de Melbourne, junior, to receive tolls for the reparation
of the bridge for three years. Given at Reading the 28th of
December, 1347.” A long list of things to pay toll, and the amount
varying from ¼d. to 6d. is given.
Another inquisition held at Newark, Oct. 26th, 1503, refers to the
chapel on Swarkeston bridge, and a parcel of meadow land, lying
between the bridge and Ingleby, granted to the Priory of Repton for a
priest to sing mass in the Chapel, which had not been done for 20
years.
In 1745 “bonnie Prince Charlie,” the Young Pretender, marched
from Derby, with his advanced guard, as far as Swarkeston Bridge,
but on the 6th of December was compelled, most reluctantly, to
commence a retreat to Scotland, which ended in the fatal battle of
Culloden Moor.
The village, now chiefly known as a fishing resort, with its church,
and posting house, is pleasantly situated on the banks of the Trent.
The ancient church was “restored” in 1876, that is to say, it was
rebuilt, with the exception of the tower and Harpur chapel. Beneath
an arch, to the north of the altar, is a raised tomb on which is fixed a
large alabaster slab, on this is carved the effigies of a man and
woman, the front of the tomb is divided into four compartments, in
the two middle ones are figures of seven sons and seven daughters.
Round the margin of the slab is the following inscription:—
“John Rolston Esquire sūtyme lord of Swarkston dysscysyd the iii.
day of De̅ c̅ ber ye yere of our lord MCCCCLxxxij, and Susane hys
wyffe dysscysyd the 23ᵈ of De̅ c̅ ber the yere of our lord MCCCCLX
and IV on whose sowlys God have mcy.”
On the south side of the chancel is the Harpur mortuary chapel. In
it are two large raised tombs, each supporting a pair of recumbent
effigies. One tomb is that of “Richard Harpur one of the justyces of
the Comen Benche at Westminster and Jane the wife, sister and
heyre of and unto Thomas Fynderne of Fynderne Esquyer. Cogita
mori.”
The other tomb bears beautifully-carved effigies of Sir John Harpur
and his first wife. Over the tomb, on a tablet, is this inscription:—“In
piam posteritatis memoriam et spem certam futuræ resurrectionis
monumentum hoc struxit Johannes Harpur Miles Filius Richardi
Harpur armigeri justiciarii de Banco Regio. Cui uxorem ducenti
Isabellam filiam Georgii Pierpont militis, Deus amplam et fœlicem
dedit filios filiasque duodecium quorum nomina scutis infra
præponuntur, Mortem obiit septᵒ die Octobris Anno Domini 1627.” In
front of the tomb, kneeling at a double prayer desk, are the figures of
seven sons, and five daughters.

STANTON-BY-BRIDGE.

Pleasantly situated on the high ground overlooking the valley of

the Trent is the village of Stanton-by-Bridge (Swarkeston). The De
Stantons were lords of the manor for many generations. In the reign
of Edward III., John Frances of Tickenhall married Margaret,
daughter and heiress of John de Stanton, so the manor passed to
the Frances family, and remained with them till an heiress of that
house married Sir Thomas Burdett, Bart., of Bramcote,
Warwickshire. About this time the manor was divided between the
Burdetts and Harpurs, each, in turn, appointing to the living. Now it is
in the sole patronage of the Harpur-Crewe family.
The church, dedicated to St. Michael, is a small one, about 60 feet
long, and consists of nave, chancel, north aisle, south porch with a
bell turret on the west gable. The chancel arch, a plain semi-circular
one, is considered to be Saxon, and the south doorway, ornamented
with chevron, or zizag, and billet mouldings, is of the Norman period,
not later than Stephen’s reign. There are several remains of incised
sepulchral slabs, and also slabs of alabaster bearing incised effigies
of the Sacheverell and Francis families. During a restoration in 1865,
some of the older slabs were discovered, and were placed as they
are now.
About a mile south of Stanton is a farmhouse called St. Bride’s,
supposed to be once a grange chapel of Burton Abbey. Built into its
walls are many remains of Norman work, and in the yard are stone
coffins, and other fragments of worked stone.
 BRETBY AND HARTSHORN.
Three miles south of Repton is the village of Bretby. Like most of
the land round, it used to belong to the Earls of Chester, from them it
passed into the hands of the Segraves, who possessed, among
other manors and estates, Coton-in-the-Elms, Rosliston, Linton, and
Repton.
In 1300 John de Segrave received a license to castellate his
mansion at Bretby. Soon after it passed, with the manor, into the
families of the Mowbrays, Dukes of Norfolk, and, through one of the
co-heiresses of that family, to the Berkeleys, who, in 1585, sold it to
Sir Thomas Stanhope, grandfather of Philip, 1st Earl of Chesterfield,
and now, by descent, it belongs to the Earl of Carnarvon.
 Plate 18.

Anchor Church. (Page 123.)

Bretby Hall. (Page 104.)

 It is not known when the castle was pulled down, but most
probably in the days of Philip, 1st Earl of Chesterfield (1585-1656),
who built a mansion on the present site, within the park. The old
castle stood on the land to the south-west of the church, the grass
covered mounds indicate the foundations of a very strong fortress,
consisting of two courts.
The stones of the castle were probably used in the building of the
mansion in the park, which must have been a grand place, built “in
the midst of a large park, well wooded, and stored with several kinds
of deer, and exotic beasts; several fine avenues of trees leading to
the house, which is of stone, though not of modern architecture, very
regular, convenient, and noble, with a very curious chapel, (designed
in the Grecian (Ionic) style, by Inigo Jones), very good outbuildings.
The gardens, after the plan of Versailles, in the old grand style, with
terraces, leaden images of wild beasts, fountains, labyrinths, groves,
greenhouses, grottoes, aviaries, &c., &c.,” the park, with its chain of
fishponds, and fine timber, must have presented a scene of
unsurpassed natural beauty. Amidst such surroundings, an open-air
masque, written by Sir Aston Cokayne, was “presented at Bretbie in
Derbyshire on Twelfth Night, 1639,” before the Earl and Countess
and a great company. The masque is printed in “Glover’s History of
Derbyshire,” Vol. II., part I., p 184.
In November, 1642, during the Civil War, the house, which had
been fortified by the Earl, witnessed another scene. Four hundred
foot, with a party of dragoons and two sacres, under the command of
Major Molanus, were sent to Bretby by Sir John Gell. They
compelled the Earl, and his garrison of 40 musketeers and 60 horse,
to abandon the house, and fly towards Lichfield. “Then the Countess
was asked by the victorious officers to give 2s. 6d. to each soldier, to
save the house from plunder, but she said she had not so much in
the house; they proposed 40 marks as a composition, to which she
returned the same answer; they then offered to advance it to her, but
she declared she would not give them a penny; then the soldiers
plundered the house, but the officers saved her own chamber, with
all her goods.” (Sir John Gell’s M.S. Narrative).
 In the year 1780, the young Earl “was persuaded ‘by an artful
steward,’ to pull down this splendid mansion and chapel, as being in
a dangerous state of decay, though it was afterwards proved to have
been very substantial.” The gardens also suffered a like fate.
Fortunately the fine cedar of Lebanon, planted in February 1676-7,
on the east side of the house, escaped destruction. It is considered
to be the oldest in the kingdom, and still flourishes, braced together
by iron chains, and is the chief object of admiration to visitors to
Bretby and its park. The present house was begun by the 5th Earl,
who died in 1815, when the building operations ceased. The
architect was Sir Geoffrey Wyatville, assisted by Mr. Martin, the
Earl’s architect. A ground plan of the house is printed on page 187 of
“Glover’s History of Derbyshire,” Vol. II., signed by W. Martin,
architect and builder, September, 1828. When completed it will form
a four-sided building, with a courtyard within it.
The church of Bretby, or rather the chapel, for it is one of the
seven chapelries of Repton, was rebuilt in the year 1877, in the
place of a very old building, built in the thirteenth century. It occupies
the old site with the addition of an aisle, which forms a large pew for
the noble owners, and a vestry, both on the north side. The village
consists of a few scattered houses. To the east of the park is Bretby
mill, on a small stream; which, rising in the Pistern hills, runs in a
northerly direction, through Repton, till it joins the river Trent.

HARTSHORN.

About four miles south of Repton is the ancient village of

Hartshorn, which at the time of the Domesday Survey belonged to
Henry de Ferrers. Later on the Priory of Repton had lands, a moiety
of a park, and the important right of free warren over the manor.
According to the list of patrons of the living, various families
succeeded to the manor, among whom are mentioned the de la
Wards, Meynells, Dethicks, the Earls of Shrewsbury, and the Earls of
Chesterfield. One of the rectors was Stebbing-Shawe, jun., (an
O.R.,) editor of the Topographer, and historian of Staffordshire. The
church, which is well placed on the higher part, with the rectory on
the east side of it, forms a very pleasing object from a distance, a
closer inspection reveals the fact that, at the restoration of 1835,
when the nave of the church was rebuilt, cast iron windows, imitating
Perpendicular tracery, were inserted! The east window of the
chancel, of two lights, belongs to the Decorated period. The
embattled tower is a fair specimen of the Perpendicular period, and
contains a ring of five bells. Three of them were placed there during
the time of Stebbing-Shawe, sen. The other two are of pre-
Reformation date, and bear well lettered inscriptions: “Hec Campana
Beata Trinitate Sancta Fiat,” and “Ave Maria Gracia Plena Dominus
Tecum.”
Under an arch in the north wall of the chancel is an altar tomb, on
which lie alabaster effigies of Humphrey Dethick, and his wife Eliza,
of Newhall. In front of the tomb are representations of their six
children, three sons and three daughters. The father and one son
are clothed in plate armour. Above the tomb is a shield bearing the
quartered arms of Dethick, Allestree and Meynell; at the east and
west ends are shields quartering Longford with Hathersaye,
Deincourt and Solney; Dethick impaling Longford, and Meynell
impaling Longford.
Many other ancient monuments used to be in the church, but they
have been “made away with.” There is a fine old parish chest, seven
feet long, in the vestry.
In Vol. VII. of the Derbyshire Archæological Society there are
many extracts from the parish records of Hartshorn: under the date
1612, an inventory of the church goods is given, the first item
mentioned is “a Co̅ m̅ uio Cupp of Silver wᵗʰ a plate of silver having
Ihon Baptᵈ head vppon it.” This plate was photographed by Mr.
Keene, of Derby, and a copy of it, with a descriptive note by Mr. St.
John Hope, was published in Vol. VIII. of the Journal. From it we
gather the following facts.
The “plate of silver” is a paten of silver-gilt, 5¼ inches in diameter.
The rim is quite plain, with the exception of four narrow lines
engraved on the extreme edge. The centre has a circular
depression, which again contains a slightly sunk sexfoil with the
spandrils filled with a rayed leaf ornament. The central device is a
Vernicle, (i.e., the face of our Saviour, as transferred to the
handkerchief of St. Veronica, and usually called a Vernicle). The
churchwardens wrongly described it as the head of St. John the
Baptist. Round the head is a nimbus, with rays issuing from it. There
are three “hall marks,” two of which, the maker’s name, a Lombardic
B in a dotted circle, and a leopard’s head crowned, are remaining;
the third, the date letter, is obliterated, so it is impossible to say, with
certainty, when it was made, but as this type of paten prevailed
between 1450 and 1530, the opinion is that its date is about 1480.
The communion cup bears the London date mark for 1611-12, and
the inscription:

Justus fide vivet + J + R + C.

1612.

The letters J. R. C. probably stand for James Royll,

Churchwarden, 1612, who, with Denis Hashard, made the inventory
at that date.

EGGINTON, STRETTON, AND TUTBURY.

At the making of the Domesday Survey, the manor of Egginton
was held by Geoffrey Alselin, and had a priest and a church. The
Alselins’ estates passed, through an heiress, into the family of
Bardulfs. Under them the manor was held by Ralph Fitz-Germund,
whose son William Fitz-Ralph, Seneschall of Normandy, and founder
of Dale-Abbey, gave it to William de Grendon, his nephew. In
exchange for Stanley, near Dale-Abbey, William’s wife gave it, as a
marriage portion of her daughter, Margaret, to Robert Fitz-Walkelin,
one of whose daughters married Sir John Chandos. At the death of
his descendant, another Sir John Chandos, one moiety of the manor
passed to his niece Elizabeth, daughter of Sir John Lawton, and wife
of Sir Peter de la Pole, one of the Knights of the Shire in 1400, from
whom it descended to the Chandos-Poles of Radbourne. Another
daughter of Robert Walkelin, Ermentrude, married Sir William de
Stafford, whose son, Robert, left it to five co-heiresses, and so their
moiety became divided into many shares, which were re-united, by
purchase, by the family of Lathbury. A co-heiress of Lathbury
brought her moiety to Robert Leigh, of Whitfield, Cheshire. In the
reign of James I., the estate passed to Anne, daughter of Sir Henry
Leigh of Egginton, who married Simon Every, Esq., of Chard,
Somersetshire, created 1st Baronet in 1641, ancestor of the present
owner, a minor, the 11th Baronet.