2 “Hysteria: A Study in Psychology,” Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease, vol. x., No. 4, October, 1883.
The alleged uterine origin of hysteria has been entirely disregarded in the definition. This has been done intentionally. It is high time for the medical profession to throw off the thraldom of this ancient view. The truth is, as asserted by Chambers,3 that hysteria “has no more to do with the organs of reproduction than with any other of the female body; and it is no truer to say that women are hysterical because they have wombs, than that men are gouty because they have beards.”
3 Brit. Med. Journ., December 21, 1861, 651.
SYNONYMS.—Hysterics, Vapors. Many Latin and other synonyms have been used for hysteria: most of these have reference to the supposed uterine origin of the disease, as, for instance, Uteri adscensus, Asthma uteri, Vapores uterini, Passio hysterica, Strangulatio uterina seu Vulvæ. Some French synonyms are Maladie imaginaire, Entranglement, and Maux ou attaques de nerfs. Other French synonyms besides these have been used; most of them are translations from the Latin, having reference also to the uterine hypothesis. In our language it is rare to have any other single word used as a synonym for hysteria. Sir James Paget4 introduced the term neuromimesis, or nervous mimicry, and suggested that it be substituted for hysteria, and neuromimetic for hysterical. Neuromimesis is, however, not a true synonym. Many cases of hysteria are cases of neuromimesis, but they are not all of this character. Among the desperate attempts which have been made to originate a new name for hysteria one perhaps worthy of passing notice is that of Metcalfe Johnson,5 who proposes to substitute the term ganglionism, as giving a clue to the pathology of hysteria. His main idea is that hysteria exhibits a train of symptoms which are almost always referable to the sympathetic or ganglionic nervous system. This is another of those half truths which have misled so many. The term hysteria, from the Greek ὑστερα, the uterus, although attacked and belabored, has come to stay; it is folly to attempt to banish it.
4 Op. cit.
5 Med. Times and Gaz., 1872, ii. 612.
METHOD OF DISCUSSING THE SUBJECT.—It is hard to decide upon the best method of discussing the subject of hysteria. One difficulty is that connected with the question whether certain affections should be considered as independent disorders or under some subdivisions of the general topic of hysteria. Certain great phases of hysteria are represented by hystero-epilepsy, catalepsy, ecstasy, etc.; but it will best serve practical ends to treat of these in separate articles. They have distinctive clinical features, and are capable of special definition and discussion.
HISTORY AND LITERATURE.—To give a complete history of hysteria it would be necessary to traverse the story of medicine from the time of Hippocrates to the present. A complete bibliography would require an immense volume. Volume vi. of the Index Catalogue of the Library of the Surgeon-General's Office, United States Army, which has appeared during the present year (1885), contains a bibliography of nearly seventeen double-column pages, most of it in the finest type. The references are to 318 books and 914 journals. The number of books and articles cited as having appeared in different languages is as follows: Latin, 99; Greek, 2; German, 180; British, 177; American, 159; French, 449; Italian, 75; Spanish, 45; Swedish, 12; miscellaneous, 34. Even this wonderful list probably only represents a tithe of the works written on this subject. Those desirous of studying it from a bibliographical point of view can do so by consulting this great work.
Many as are the names and voluminous as is the literature, certain names and certain works are pre-eminent—Sydenham, Laycock, and Skey in England; Tissot, Briquet, Charcot, and Landouzy in France; Stahl, Frank, Eulenburg, and Jolly in Germany; and in America, Weir Mitchell. The greatest work on hysteria is the treatise of Briquet.6
6 Traité clinique et thérapeutique de l'Hystérie, par le Dr. P. Briquet, 1859.