Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume 1: The Evolution of Modesty; The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity; Auto-ErotismEllis, Havelock
Science
Studies in the Psychology of Sex, Volume 1: The Evolution of Modesty; The Phenomena of Sexual Periodicity; Auto-Erotism
Ellis, Havelock
Sex; Sex (Psychology)
It was the belief of the ancient Greeks that hysteria came from the womb;
hence its name. We first find that statement in Plato's _Timæus_: "In men
the organ of generation--becoming rebellious and masterful, like an animal
disobedient to reason, and maddened with the sting of lust--seeks to gain
absolute sway; and the same is the case with the so-called womb, or
uterus, of women; the animal within them is desirous of procreating
children, and, when remaining unfruitful long beyond its proper time, gets
discontented and angry, and, wandering in every direction through the
body, closes up the passages of the breath, and, by obstructing
respiration,[253] drives them to extremity, causing all varieties of
disease."
Plato, it is true, cannot be said to reveal anywhere a very scientific
attitude toward Nature. Yet he was here probably only giving expression to
the current medical doctrine of his day. We find precisely the same
doctrine attributed to Hippocrates, though without a clear distinction
between hysteria and epilepsy.[254] If we turn to the best Roman
physicians we find again that Aretæus, "the Esquirol of antiquity," has
set forth the same view, adding to his description of the movements of the
womb in hysteria: "It delights, also, in fragrant smells, and advances
toward them; and it has an aversion to foetid smells, and flies from them;
and, on the whole, the womb is like an animal within an animal."[255]
Consequently, the treatment was by applying foetid smells to the nose and
rubbing fragrant ointments around the sexual parts.[256]
The Arab physicians, who carried on the traditions of Greek medicine,
appear to have said nothing new about hysteria, and possibly had little
knowledge of it. In Christian mediæval Europe, also, nothing new was added
to the theory of hysteria; it was, indeed, less known medically than it
had ever been, and, in part it may be as a result of this ignorance, in
part as a result of general wretchedness (the hysterical phenomena of
witchcraft reaching their height, Michelet points out, in the fourteenth
century, which was a period of special misery for the poor), it flourished
more vigorously. Not alone have we the records of nervous epidemics, but
illuminated manuscripts, ivories, miniatures, bas-reliefs, frescoes, and
engravings furnish the most vivid iconographic evidence of the prevalence
of hysteria in its most violent forms during the Middle Ages. Much of this
evidence is brought to the service of science in the fascinating works of
Dr. P. Richer, one of Charcot's pupils.[257]
In the seventeenth century Ambroise Paré was still talking, like
Hippocrates, about "suffocation of the womb"; Forestus was still, like
Aretæus, applying friction to the vulva; Fernel was still reproaching
Galen, who had denied that the movements of the womb produced hysteria.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account