Hypnotism made plain

The story of the origin and development of hypnotism—or mesmerism, as it was once called—is not only interesting in itself, as history, but also helpful to a clear understanding of its modern phases and applications.

What we now call suggestion and hypnotism, and recognize as purely psychological phenomena, were originally believed to be manifestations of a peculiar, universally disseminated fluid, analogous to the ether of the physicists, which could be absorbed by various substances and discharged therefrom.

As early as 1530, the celebrated Swiss physician Paracelsus (1493-1541)—founder of medical chemistry—advanced the theory of “personal magnetism,” or magnetic influences, derived from the universal cosmic magnetic “fluid” or force which, he declared, bound the stars together, and permeated all living things. Each man carries within his own body, he said, a twofold magnetism, one healthful, the other morbid. The magnetism of a healthy person attracts the morbid magnetism of a sick person, thus relieving the latter of his malady. Absorbed by the healthy person, the morbid magnetic force is transformed at once into wholesome magnetism.

Dr. Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus Paracelsus von Hohemeim—Paracelsus’ real name—may or may not have fully believed in his theory of transferable magnetism. He was—for his time—a great physician, and as such a very practical man—a forerunner of the modern pragmatists. If belief in his doctrine on the part of his patient would act as a curative agency, Paracelsus would undoubtedly utilize this doctrine, just as he did astrology—belief in which was universal in his day and age. He appears to have been fully aware of the value of faith if not of suggestion in the cure of disease. “It is all one,” he remarks, “whether you believe in something real or something false, it will have the same effect upon you.... It is always the faith that works the miracle, and whether the faith is aroused by something real or something false its miraculous power is the same.”

A few years later, Jean Baptist van Helmont, “father of chemistry” (1577-1644), stimulated by diligent perusal of the works of Paracelsus, adopted and expounded the doctrine that man possessed a magnetic force capable of healing the sick.⁠[1]

The Paracelsean doctrine of a healing magnetic force was introduced into England by Robert Fludd (1574-1637), the physician and theosophist (a partisan of the Rosicrucians). We hear little or nothing of this doctrine in French works until the year 1766, when appeared the dissertation, “De planetarum influxu” (“On the Influence of the Planets”), of the Viennese physician, Friedrich Anton Mesmer (1734-1815)—born near Constance, and later resident in Paris.

Mesmer, like Paracelsus, believed that a magnetic element or fluid pervaded the universe and pervaded all bodies. Following Descartes, he denied that there could be a vacuum anywhere within the cosmos, since the mutual influence between the stars and planets “is transmitted by a fluid universally disseminated, and everywhere continuous, so that no vacuum can exist.” This universal fluid—analogous to the hypothetic ether of space of modern physicists—“is, by its very nature, enabled to receive and retain all impressions of movement, to propagate them and transmit them.” In the human body this medium expresses itself in conditions related to magnetism, and the forces exhibited are of the nature of Animal Magnetism. This force, says Mesmer, may be transferred from the human body to both inanimate and animate bodies, certain substances being more susceptible to this influence than others. “The magnet, too, artificial, as well as natural, is susceptible to animal magnetism, without any impairment of its influence upon iron or the magnetic needle. From this we see that the artificial magnet possesses qualities which are efficacious in sickness, and that if we obtain successful results from its application, these are due merely to animal magnetism.”

Mesmer laid down rules of procedure in accordance with which “this principle is able to cure maladies of the nervous system directly, and other maladies indirectly.”

This method of healing was put into practice in Vienna about 1763, with the co-operation of Dr. Maximillian Hell, Professor of Astronomy, and it is recorded that a number of cures were effected.

Having been bred for the church, it was not difficult for Dr. Mesmer to pass from a belief in cures by “sacred relics” to the treatment of diseases by application of magnetized plates, rings, collars, amulets, etc. As in the case of many “faith” healers of our own day, Mesmer’s fame soon became widespread, reports of his marvelous cures even reaching the court of Louis XVI.

Under the patronage of Marie Antoinette, Mesmer held seances to which people of all classes flocked for treatment, including many men distinguished in the arts and sciences. Unfortunately, Mesmer elected to invest himself and his procedure with an atmosphere of mysticism, arraying himself in yellow robes, bearing a wand in his hand, suggestive of the staff of the ancient followers of Aesculapius.

In the light of our present-day knowledge regarding the power of suggestion as a curative agent, we are not surprised to learn that Dr. Mesmer was able to effect many remarkable cures by convincing his patients of the therapeutic virtues of his magnetized paraphernalia.

Believing as he undoubtedly did that he possessed an “animal magnetism” which could be transferred to inanimate substances, including water, glass, iron, etc., Mesmer constructed his curious “baquet.” This weird apparatus consisted of a wooden tub with an iron rod placed vertically in the center, around which were arranged layers of corked bottles filled with magnetized water—“magnetized” by his own hands, just as he believed he could pass his own “magnetic fluid” directly into the body of a patient. Each bottle was supplied with a conductor, i. e., an iron wire running through the cork and in contact with the central rod. The tub was filled with water, iron filings, pounded glass and sand, previously magnetized by passes of Mesmer’s hands, or by his merely breathing upon them. That the magnetic effluvia might not escape and be dissipated in space, a closely-fitting cover was placed on the tub. “Conductors” passed from the source of the emanations, or fluid, to the patient—woolen or cotton cords, which the patients twined around their bodies. Soft iron rods projected from the baquet, which were placed in contact with any desired part of the patient’s body.

Seated around the baquet, lulled by soft music issuing from the adjoining room, the patients gazed at the dim light, in a more or less hypnotic condition, while the “animal magnetism” supplied by the baquet did its curative work. Mesmer and his assistants passed from one patient to another, making mystic passes over them—directing the fluid—or touching them with the rods. Patients of hysterical temperament sometimes fell into convulsions, which were interpreted by Mesmer as a favorable sign. He even went so far as to assert that there could be no permanent cures without these so-called “crises.” It was not long before Mesmer was publicly denounced as a charlatan and disappeared from the public eye.

Mesmer’s sensational success doubtless aroused the jealousy of the “regular” medical profession. It is known that his claims were very superficially investigated by a committee of scientists. He was duly branded as a quack, and retired into comparative obscurity, “to walk silent on the shore of the Bodensee, meditating on much.” A monument marks his grave in the churchyard of the Meersburg, placed there by admiring German physicians.

Mesmer honestly regarded himself as a martyr, the victim of envious competitors. And we need not doubt that many victims of disease were aided or actually cured by his methods, though no magnetic fluid issued from his rings and amulets to be guided by his mystic wand; just as in our days sufferers are helped—through auto-suggestion—by the “anti-rheumatic ring,” “electric” belts and pads void of electricity, or pink pills containing no curative drugs. All of these devices are but modern recrudescences of the very ancient practice of suggestion and hypnosis, “laying on of hands,” touching the king’s gold ring, or the ancient custom of healing by the art of making passes.

In the temples of Isis, of Osiris and of Serapis, hypnotism and suggestion were common practices. Indeed, some form of psycho-therapeutics, by means of touch or passes, was practiced amongst all the nations of antiquity whose records have come down to us even in fragmentary form. We are assured by Plutarch that Pyrrhus, the famous king of Epirus, was able to relieve colic and affections of the spleen by laying the patients on their backs and passing his great toe over them. Cures by the laying on of hands were effected also by pagan Roman emperors and Christian saints, as well as by the priests of ancient Egypt, Babylonia, Assyria, Chaldea, Persia, China and India—accompanied by mystic “passes.”

Why not, then, cures by the baquet of Mesmer, or the “Oscilloclast” of Dr. Albert Abrams, as well as the healing at Lourdes, St. Anne de Beaupré and other shrines? A magnetic element pervades the universe and penetrates all bodies, said Mesmer, capable of receiving and communicating all kinds of motions and impressions. All bodies are radio-active, said Abrams, and emit electronic vibrations (?) capable of reinforcing and finally breaking down the electronic waves characteristic of each disease. Relics of the saints have the power of healing the sick, says the Roman Catholic Church. And in each case the cures are assuredly made—by suggestion and auto-suggestion.

When an Australian aborigine believes (imagines) that an enemy has struck him at a distance, to all intents and purposes he is so struck. Promptly he lies down and becomes actually ill—through the power of auto-suggestion—frequently followed by gradual loss of vitality ending before long in death (Klaatsch). But this power of the imagination (auto-suggestion) to work harm—as well as good—is not confined to savages. Baudouin tells of a case, noted by Coué, of a nun who was confined to her bed by illness during the winter. She soon recovered, becoming well and strong again. On April 1st her appetite disappeared, in a few days she was again confined to her bed, and she died before the end of the month. She thought she had heard her physician say, during her winter illness, “She won’t outlive April.” The suggestion that she was to die before the close of April became fixed in her mind, so, feeling sure that she would die in April, in April she died. Many similar cases are on record.

With the exception of the private—and gratuitous—work carried on by the Marquis de Puységur, who substituted a gentle sleep for convulsions, and by the Abbé Faria, who was the first to state the doctrine of suggestion, we hear very little about mesmerism in France for some years following the retirement of its founder.

In England a number of physicians became interested. Among the pioneers should be mentioned John Elliotson (1837), whose attention was directed to the subject by a French nobleman, to whose house leading members of the medical profession had been invited to witness a demonstration. Dr. Elliotson was profoundly impressed by the experiments there witnessed, and used his position on the staff of University College Hospital to employ mesmerism in treating patients. He was particularly successful in cases of nervous diseases. As President of the Royal Medical and Chirurgical Societies, his opinion would, in any other instance, have carried great weight. Owing to the characteristic conservatism not only of the medical profession, but of scientists in general, his use of mesmerism in the hospital, though remarkably successful, was met by the violent opposition that pertains to most radical departures from the practices sanctioned by “authority.” Refusing to bow to the mandate of unreasoned conservatism, Dr. Elliotson was obliged to resign. Retiring to private practice, he continued the use of mesmerism with increasingly satisfactory results, though unaware of the fact that no “animal magnetism”—or vital fluid—was involved in the process. This discovery was due to James Braid, a noted surgeon of Manchester.

Having witnessed a public exhibition of so-called mesmerism, Braid became convinced (1841) that there was therapeutic value in the method. He determined to explore the subject thoroughly, concerning himself not only with the practical application of hypnotism, but also with an attempt to explain the fundamental nature of the phenomena witnessed. Accepting, tentatively, the theories advanced by Mesmer, he soon arrived at the conclusion that there was no “vital force” or “animal magnetism” involved; hence there could be no question of magnets, metals, and crystals transmitting such a curative fluid. Braid found, by experiment, that he could produce all the phenomena attributed to the action of Mesmer’s “vital fluid” by merely inducing the patient to fix his gaze upon any bright object, held at a short distance in front of and slightly higher than the level of the patient’s eyes, accompanied by concentration of the mind on the object. The desired state of drowsiness or even complete unconsciousness was shown to be evokable without resort to magnets or passes, the phenomenon being entirely subjective, and quite independent of “animal magnetism.” He attributed hypnosis to a tiring of the sensory organs.

Braid noted that the depths of the sleep induced varied in different persons from slight drowsiness to a state of complete unconsciousness. The latter condition he defined as “neurohypnotism, or nervous sleep, a peculiar condition of the nervous system produced by artificial contrivance.” He later proposed that this condition be termed Hypnosis, and the process involved Hypnotism, or Neurohypnology, limiting the term “hypnotic sleep” to those cases where on awakening entire forgetfulness of all that had occurred during sleep was acknowledged by the patient. Braid was first to demonstrate that there is a close relationship between hypnosis and natural sleep.

As might be expected by a student of the history of science, Braid’s very important work failed to elicit the support and encouragement of the British medical fraternity, who should have been most profoundly interested in his results. In Germany and Switzerland, however, his name was held in honor, a number of investigators on the Continent having become deeply interested in the practical application of hypnotism to medical practice. Among these may be mentioned Krafft-Ebing, Preyer, Oskar Vogt, Euelenburg, Heidenhain, Wetterstrand, Forel and Albert Moll. It has well been said that Braid laid the foundation of the theories elaborated later (1891-4) by F. W. H. Myers, of Cambridge, and Carpenter, basing the phenomena of hypnotism on the existence and activity of a subliminal consciousness.

In 1860, the year of Braid’s death, his discovery of the subjective nature of so-called mesmerism was published by the Paris Academy of Science.

The researches of Braid attracted the attention of Dr. Liébault, of Nancy, who, in 1864, opened up a dispensary in that town for the gratuitous treatment of the poor by hypnotism. Braid was first to assert that suggestion was the only external factor involved in producing the phenomena of hypnosis, but the credit for demonstrating this fact beyond a doubt is usually given to Liébault, who disavowed Braid’s “tired senses” theory, pronouncing hypnotism to be wholly the result of suggestion (in an essay in 1866). This pioneer did not, however, explain the condition of mind necessary for the production of the phenomena of hypnotism. The elucidation of this problem was the work of F. W. H. Myers.

Myers assumed that man is endowed with both a supraliminal consciousness and a subliminal or subconscious intelligence—taking ordinary consciousness as a hypothetical level or limen (threshold). This theory does not predicate the existence of two minds, however, or two separate intelligences. Myers wished merely to point out that the stream of consciousness in which we habitually live is not our only one, and forms, in fact, only a small part of our total personality, most of which lies below the threshold of our ordinary waking consciousness. But the subliminal part of personality is by no means “merely an unconscious complex of organic processes, but an intelligent vital control.”

Modern psycho-therapeutics (mind-treatment of disease, through suggestion), as also psycho-analysis, takes for granted the dual functioning of mind, one part conscious, the other part subconscious. Hypnotism and suggestion become understandable on the hypothesis put forth by Myers, and on no other theory can we account for the phenomena involved. “By means of hypnotism the attention of the conscious mind may be distracted, and this leaves the operator free to communicate with the subconscious.”

This in brief is the history of the progress from “animal magnetism” to hypnotism through purely psychical (mental) methods. It but remains to add a few words relative to the new views introduced by Emile Coué, colleague (1885-86) of Liébault, founder of the first school of Nancy, as Coué may justly be called founder of the “New Nancy School.”

The originality of Coué’s work consists in the fact that by his method cures are effected without resort to hypnosis or even to the suggestion of a second person. He relies entirely upon auto-suggestion, which he regards as the effective force in hypnotic suggestion. Furthermore, it is conceded by several eminent authorities that Coué has fully established the law of reversed effort, which is said to be operative in all cases of suggestion. Effective auto-suggestion depends upon the elimination—or at least the partial elimination—of the conscious will. Will-power must give way to the curative—not to say creative—power of the imagination. “In a conflict between will and imagination,” says Coué, “the power of imagination is in direct proportion to the square of the will-power.”⁠[2]