The asclepian dream healings and hypnosis: A critique

International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis ISSN: 0020-7144 (Print) 1744-5183 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/l...
6 downloads 1 Views 866KB Size
International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis

ISSN: 0020-7144 (Print) 1744-5183 (Online) Journal homepage: http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/nhyp20

The asclepian dream healings and hypnosis: A critique Henderikus J. Stam & Nicholas P. Spanos To cite this article: Henderikus J. Stam & Nicholas P. Spanos (1982) The asclepian dream healings and hypnosis: A critique, International Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 30:1, 9-22, DOI: 10.1080/00207148208407254 To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00207148208407254

Published online: 31 Jan 2008.

Submit your article to this journal

Article views: 56

View related articles

Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=nhyp20 Download by: [University of Calgary]

Date: 14 June 2016, At: 20:41

THE ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS AND HYPNOSIS: A CRITIQUE’ HENDERIKUS J. STAM AND NICHOLAS P. SPANOS 2.3

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

Carleton Wnitjersity, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

Abstract: The present papw critically evaluates the popular contention that the dream healings which occurred in antiquity at the Asclepian temples resulted from the unwitting L I S of ~ hypnosis. This contention is found wanting and it is argued instead that these reported healings can he understood better b y considering them in their cultural context.

The Asclepian cult was the most important of the divine healing cults in ancient Greece and played a central role in the religious and cultural life of antiquity from the fourth century B.C. onward. Modern histories of medicine and psychology, however, focus almost exclusively on one aspect of the cult’s practices, the incubation^,^ the so-called “dream healings.” Although practices differed somewhat depending on the locality, in general supplicants went to Asclepian temples to be healed and slept overnight in the ubaton,” the place in the temple where the god purportedly appeared. While asleep, the supplicant dreamed of the god Asclepius who either healed the supplicant immediately, or who prescribed various medicines and regimens that would lead to a cure (E. J . Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945). The present paper is concerned with the interpretation that hypnosis was involved in the dream healings (e.g., Conn, 1957; Gindes, 1951; Kroger, 1976; Kroger & Fezler, 1976, LeCron & Bordeaux, 1947; Ludwig, 1964; MacHovec, 1975, 1979; Pulos, 1980). Various forms of this interpretation have been common since the late nineManuscript submitted J u n e 6, 1980; final revision received April 23, 1981. ’This work was supported by an SSHRC Doctoral Fellowship awarded to Henderikus J . Stam. 2The authors wish to thank A.B. Laver, Paul Potter, and H.L. Radtke for critically reading earlier versions of this manuscript. %eprint requests should be addressed to Henderikus J. Stam, Department of Psychology, Carleton University, Ottawa, Ontario, K1S 5B6, Canada. ‘From the Latin incubare, “to lie in.” Incubations were practiced in other locations in ancient Greece and not limited to the Asclepian temples. The cures reported in the Asclepian temples are medical cures and rarely include the granting of nonmedical wishes. ’Literally “place not to be entered unbidden” or “place not to be trodden, but to be kept pure” although often referred to simply as the “sleeping place” (cf. Meier, 1949/1967).

10

STAM AND SPANOS

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

teenth century. The present authors will argue that these interpretations have in common a tendency to examine evidence outside of its historical context and in so doing distort it until it appears congruent with a particular author’s theoretical perspective. In short, the present authors will contend that t he dream healings may be accounted for more parsimoniously by eschewing modern constructs such as “hypnosis” o r “hysteria” and instead viewing the events in their historical context. HYPNOSIS AND TEMPLEMEDICINE Evidence concerning the treatments and rituals carried out at Asclepian temples comes from two sources- literary materials (statements in plays or books) and inscriptions on stone slabs (steles) that were located in the vicinity of the temples. The literary sources were products of the upper classes while the testimonies are generally considered to be the products of commoners (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945).‘ Although the testimonies are abundant, all of them were written from the point of view of praising the god and his deeds. Like any testimonial, they must be understood in terms of the audience they were intended to influence (i.e., those who visited the temples). While these testimonies contain much useful information about temple practices, they cannot be considered unbiased descriptions of actual healings. The literary sources are less abundant than the testimonies, but no more objective. For instance, Aristophanes’s (448-380 B.C.) play Plutus is the major literary source of evidence for the details of temple ritual. Aristophanes, however, was a comic poet whose writings about temple practices cannot be considered accurate (Behr, 1968; Phillips, 1973). As E.J. Edelstein and L. Edelstein (1945) point out, “it can hardly be expected that [Aristophanes] should give a picture of the situation satisfying to the curiosity of the scholar or to be accepted without making allowance for poetic fantasy and comic license [11, p. 1461.”

Location of the Temples It is commonly asserted that Asclepian temples were usually situated on high grounds or in beautiful mountain valleys surrounded by groves of trees and springs of water (e.g., Alexander & Selesnick, 1966; Bromberg, 1959; MacHovec, 1979). Because of their supposed locations, it is sometimes assumed that a journey to the temples necessitated a long pilgrimage and an alteration from an urban to a rural environment (MacHovec, 1979; Marcuse, 1959). An implication sometimes drawn from these assertions is ‘E.J. Edelstein and L. Edelstein (1945), Volume I, present the most mmplete translated collection of verbatim testimonies to Asclepius available. The present authors will use these predominantly as support for our arguments.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINCS AND HYPNOSIS

11

that the serene location of the temples, coupled with expectancies for cure enhanced during long pilgrimages, facilitated the supplicant’s susceptibility to hypnotic influence (MacHovec, 1979; Marcuse, 1959). This widely accepted notion of the location of the temples could have arisen from a passage in Vitruvius’s (first century B.C.) De Architectura (1955, I) suggesting that all temples should be built in places that are “healthy,” near fresh springs of water and away from “pe~tilence,”~ or from a claim by Plutarch (46-120 A.D.) that the Greeks chose clean, elevated places outside of cities for Asclepian temples (Plutarch, 1924). In fact, actual temple locations as determined by archaeologists were not particularly “healthful.” For instance, the Asclepian temple in Laconia was situated in a swamp. Moreover, while temples were sometimes located on mountain tops or in valleys, they were most likely to be located in cities. In short, a trip to a temple did not necessarily (or even usually) involve a long pilgrimage to a rural locale (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, Pp. 158-159, 232257; Pausanias [second century A.D.] cited in E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, I, Pp. 376-377). Even when it did, there was no sudden alteration in the person’s environment because city life and country life were not uniquely distinct in ancient Greece (Kitto, 1957). Finally, it is worth noting that healings were not limited to the temples. They purportedly could occur at home, or by the side of the road, or anywhere while the supplicant prayed (Behr, 1968; E.J. Edelstein (Ir L. Edelstein, 1945; Livius [59 B.C.- 17 A. D.], 1964).

Admission to the Temples Several investigators assert that supplicants were screened for admission. In fact, Alexander and Selesnick (1966) stated that “not all who wished treatment were admitted to the temples; if a supplicant’s disease was too severe, he was turned away, for the Aesculapian cult depended on its reputation [p. 271.” Similarly, MacHovec (1979) contended that initial screening enabled the priest-physicians to taylor treatments to the individual personalities of t h e supplicants. The available evidence suggests instead that probably little screening took place. The testimonies indicate that all were allowed to enter t h e temple but that the morally unprepared were not healed.8 In late antiquity, even those patients who had no financial means to make offerings were allowed to remain in t h e temples. They were housed in buildings attached to the temples that served more or less as poorhouses (Bolkestein, 1937). ‘E.J. Edelstein and L. Edelstein (1945, 11) say this suggestion was probably due to the incidence of malaria in Italy at the time (1st century B.C.). “Cf. Plato’s (427-347 B.C.) Republic (1946)iii. 14, 15, and 16 where he states that Asclepius is not given to treating those who do not live a sound life.

12

STAM A N D SPANOS

Purtjication Rites and Ritual Several investigators have contentled that supplicants participated in a variety of purification rites and rituals (Alexander & Selesnick, 1966; Deutsch, 1946; MacHovec, 1979; Marciise, 1959). Moreover, it is sometimes asserted that these rituals engendered a hypnotic state. For example, MacHovec (1979) contended that a hypnotic state was facilitated by the bathing with ‘special’ water symbolizing cleansing the mind”; engaging in “hymn singing, for committment and trust”; and being exposed to “repetition, by rhythmic massage and chanting, to establish a stimulus-response pattern [p. 881.’’ In fact, bathing was probably deinanded in all Greek cults and the water was not referred to i n any way as “special.” Bathing was considered a purification rite and the nature of the water was not a factor considered important (E.J . Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 194S, 11, Pp. 148-149). Bathing did not symbolize a “cleansing of the mind”; it was considered a purification of both body and soul (E.J . Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, Pp. 126, 149). Furthermore, it is unlikely that supplicants were required to engage in activities like hymn singing and chanting. These assertions can be traced to confusion between ceremonies carried out at the temple by members of the Asclepian cult with those required of the sick. For the sick, there was no need for hymn singing, solemn ceremonies, special clothing, or fasting from food or wine. Little ritual was required, and what there was, was devoid of any exotic or unusual components (Behr, 1968, Kerknyi, 1947/1960; E.J. Edelstein Clr L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, Pp. 148-154).

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016



Incubation

The supplicant gave an offering and at night went to the abaton to sleep and await the appearance of the god in a dream. A number of authors have speculated that hypnosis was employed to guide the supplicants’ experiences during this period. For instance, MacHovec (1979) states, “How like Mesmer, with his flowing robes, dim lights, music, candelight, and ba[n]quet [p. 89]!” and the “priest-physician maintained rapport, formulated the treatment plan, and reinforced it in the mind of the patient . . . influencing the dreamwork, guiding the trance state, or making posthypnotic suggestions for recovery [p. 881.’’Similarly, Deutsch (1946) states, Custoniarily, an attendant, dressed as a god, would walk slowly and sedately through the teinple as morning approached and, by touching thc ailing devotees, indicate where their ills werr se;ltcd, and perhaps b m d clown to whisper a rcmcdial formula in their ears. ‘To the tense,

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS AND HYPNOSIS

13

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

excited and anticipatory minds of the sick, it was not difficult to believe that they were being visited b y a bonafirle divinity [Pp. 6-71,

Bromberg (1959) believes that “sometimes ventriloquism on the part of the priest-attendants aided the patient’s spirit to converse with his Aesculapian god [p. 271.” None of these contentions are supported b y the available evidence. The priests did not think of themselves as physicians nor did their followers.’ There is no evidence that they suggested treatments or “formulated a treatment plan.’’ The priests’ role was to implement the procedures prescribed in the dreams of the supplicants, and not to prescribe treatments of their own (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, Pp. 158-162). These questionable interpretations are based on a passage from Aristophanes’s comedy Plutus (lines 633-747). In the play, the witness of an incubation scene watches the proceedings through a hole in his robe. He sees the god, accompanied by two enormous snakes, cure the blindness of his sleeping friend. Unfortunately, this account is one of the few extant descriptions of an incubation. These investigators (Bromberg, 1959; Deutsch, 1946; MacHovec, 1979)have assumed that the scene is veridical, and that priests disguised as the god and accompanied by trained snakes treated the sick. In fact, there is little evidence to suggest that crude chicanery of this kind was a part of the healing ritual. Even in the play, it was the god and not a disguised priest who performed the cure. In fact, the god was never seen by anyone awake. The visions of the god reported by the supplicants were dream visions (Behr, 1968, Pp. 23-40; E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, Pp. 162-173; KerBnyi, 1947/1960). In short, reconstructions of Asclepian dream healings in terms of hypnotic suggestions are based primarily on selective citation from secondary sources of dubious validity. A reasonable part of these arguments lies in the assertion that the kinds of variables currently classified in the psychotherapy literature as “nonspecific treatment procedures” (e.g., factors that strengthen patients’ beliefs in the efficacy of the treatment, cf. Frank, 1973) produced the subjective impression of improvement in some patients. No doubt this is true. Indeed, it is a truism that can be stated about almost any treatment procedure. It does not constitute evidence that Asclepian priests unwittingly employed hypnotic induction procedures or that patients were sometimes cured because they had been hypnotized. ’In Athens there was a report that priests had Iwen chosen hy lot and Aristides (who spent long periods of tinie at the Asclepieia) attests that priests were therapeutue or attendants to the god (Behr, 1968; Meier, 194911967). At Pergamum, the priesthood was an hereditary lifetime office: at Smyrna, elective; and at Chalcedoii, ptirchasetl (Hehr, 1968).

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

14

STAM AND SPANOS

INTERPRETATION OF THE CURES Interpretations of the temple cures have abounded for hundreds of years. In the seventeenth century they were thought to be the work of pagan demons and the healings were accepted at face value (Herrlich, 1911). In the nineteenth century, despite the opposition of certain philologists (and even hypnotists, see Regnier, 1891), these dream healings were attributed to an unwitting use of “animal magnetism” and “somnambulism” (Herrlich, 1911). Asclepian priests were spiritists. Religious experience was capable of curing disease. All the cures had been faked or made up (cf. E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945; Herrlich, 1911, for reviews). The twentieth century has seen further interpretations by specialists in the health sciences, the two most influential being that any healing was largely restricted to the curing of the “mentally ill,” particularly “hysterics” (e.g., Cesbron, 1909; Sigerist, 1961; Veith, 1965, 1974, 1977; Zilboorg & Henry, 1941), or that the effectiveness of the treatment was due to some form of suggestion (Alexander & Selesnick, 1966; Bromberg, 1959; Mora, 1978) or hypnosis (e.g., Conn, 1957; Gindes, 1951; Kroger, 1976; Kroger & Fezler, 1976; LeCron Lk Bordeaux, 1947; Ludwig, 1964; MacHovec, 1975, 1979; Yulos, 1980). Such interpretations invariably reduce to “presentist” versions of historical events. Implicit in these interpretations is the assumption that our current interpretations of “mental health” and “ill health,” and of “hypnosis” and “suggestion” are in some fundamental sense correct or “real,” and can therefore be applied in a straightforward manner to explain historical events that seem to share similarities with modern happenings (Spanos, 1978; Stocking, 1965). The result is a ratification of the present. Historians of the social sciences have been at pains to present an alternative view of history, though not all are in agreement (see Buss, 1977; Hymes, 1963; Stocking, 1965). What they have in common, is that the individual historical phenomenon, removed from a complex context for the sake of comparison with present ideas, “is prone to anachronistic misinterpretation [Stocking, 1965, p. 2121.” Undoubtedly, interpretations of temple medicine changed with ideas of the “correct” way to classify “unnatural” phenomena. As mentioned above, seventeeth century authors held that the cures were factual occiirrences produced by demons rather than a god, while nineteenth century authors posited animal magnetism, somnabulism, and spiritism as explanations (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945; Herrlich, 1911). Modern explanations in terms of hypnosis have fared little better. The concept of hypnosis is, at best, vague and ambiguous and many of the behaviors associated with this label have changed quite substantially over the years (Spanos & Gottlieb, 1979). For most investigators the term

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS AND HYPNOSIS

15

“hypnosis” refers to an ill-defined altered state of consciousness, the characteristics of which have never been clearly denoted or agreed upon (Barber, 1969; Spanos & Chaves, 1969). Moreover, there is little agreement as to variables that are necessary and sufficient for producing an hypnotic state. For historical reasons, most current investigators employ hypnotic inductions that consist primarily of verbal suggestions for relaxation and sleep (e.g., Barber, 1969; Weitzenhoffer & Hilgard, 1959). Others (BBnyai & Hilgard, 1976; Ludwig & Lyle, 1964) ernploy inductions aimed at increasing rather than reducing activation and altertness. Some (Sheehan & Perry, 1976) argue that the largely nonverbal “passes” made by Mesmer and his followers were variations of hypnotic induction procedures, while others (Hilgard & Tart, 1966; Connors & Sheehan, 1978) contend that very brief control instructions, such as simply asking subjects to imagine the suggested events, induce hypnosis in some individuals. The historian intent on demonstrating that some ancient or arcane healing practice involved hypnosis, be it Asclepian dream healing, Christian exorcism, or Egyptian temple healing, can support his position by citing evidence of similarity between some aspect of the healing procednres being investigated and some modern investigator’s notion of what constitutes an hypnotic induction procedure. “Evidence” of this sort can do little to enhance our understanding either of historical phenomena or of modern phenomena classified under the rubric of hypnosis. Asclepian temple medicine can hest be understood not in terms of hypnosis, but in terms of its proper context-ancient Greece. THE CULTURAL CONTEXT OF ASCLEPIAN HEALING Asclepian temples and the cult of Asclepius played important functions in Greek arid Graeco-Koman cultures. Although the occupations of priest and physician were distinct, religious and medical thought were interwoven in Ancient Greece (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945; L. Edelstein, 1937). Epiphanies (i.e.,appearances of divine beings) were viewed as common and normal occurrences. Debate concerning their reality was largely nonexistent (Herzog, 1931). Moreover, the strategic placement of tablets (steles) inscribed with cures and located in and around the temple may have aided the sick in having the “appropriate kind” of dreams. lo Only at Epidaurus, the center of Asclepian cult for centuries, were those epigraphic testimonies recovered, but they may have existed at other locations as well (Herzog, 1931).All the cases on Stele I from Epidaurus “’Modern laboratory investigations have shown dream content to be readily influenced by a variety of presleep stimuli including direct requests to dream on specified topics, stressful situations, and arousing films (e.g., Breger, Hunter, & Lane, 1971; Fiss, 1979; Walker & Johnson, 1974; Witkin & Lewis, 3967).

16

STAM AND SPANOS TABLE 1 SYMETOMS, THEATMENTS, A N D OUTCOMES G I V E N I N EPIDAUHIAN S T E L E

1,

lnscriptiones Gruecoe, Iv“

Treatment

Symptoms 1. Woman with five years’

pregnancy

Incubation -none specifically mentioned

Oil tcome

“. . . bore a son who, immediately after hirth, washed himself at the fonntain and walked ahout with his mother”

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

2. Woman without

offspring, followed hy three years’ pregnancy 3. “Man whose fingers

(i) asked for pregnancy

(i) hecame pregnant

(ii) asked for birth

(ii) had to return to ask for

birth “the god . . . sprang upon his hand, and stretched out

with the exception of one, were paralyzed.”

his [the patient’s] fingers”

4. Woman, “blind of one

the god “cut the diseased

eye’’

5. “Voiceless boy”

eyeball and poured in some drug.” none

Despite his initial incredulity, all his fingers straightened. “walked out sound” at daybreak and dedicated a silver pig to the temple for her previous incredulity Boy snddenly spoke i n response to a request to his father for a thank-offering shoultl the boy he cured and ’‘ . . . after that became well.”

6. Paridarus with “marks

on his forehead”

“god bound the marks round with a headhand” which was removed at

Freed of the marks and dedicated the hand to the temple

daybreak.

7. Man with “marks on his fimhead”

Rorind with the headband of Pandariis

8. boy “siiffering from

god asked him what he

The marks from Pandariis (ahove) were added to his own since he failed to deliver money Paiitlarus had given him as an offering to Asclepiiis.

stone”

would offer

hoy answered “ten dice” at which the god laughed. At daybreak the boy walked ont sound

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS A N D HYPNOSIS

17

TABLE 1 cont.

9. Man “so blind that in one of his eyes he had

vision of the god pouring il drug into hi, eyes

“sight of both eyes restored”

only the eye lids leftwithin them was nothing, but they were entirely empty” 10. Porter who had broken his master’s goblet

None

Gol,let was made whole on his way to the Temple after which the master dedicated

outside the temple.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

the goblet to the god.

I nculxation

“was healed”

12. Man who “had for six years the point of a spear in his jaw”

god extracted the \pearhead during sleep

departed cnred with the

13. Man “with leeches.”

god opened his chest and removed thr leeche5

“At daybreak he departed with the leeches in his

1 1 . Man “in a pitiable State of I)lindness” following a fall

spearhead in his hands

hands” and was well 14. “Man with a stone in

his membrinn”

dreamt “lying with a fair h y , ” ejected storit*i n

“Walkrd oiit holding it in his hands.”

seminal discliarge. 15 Man “paralyzed in I)Otl)

Incubation

Healed and carried a large stone t o the ‘lemple

N o treatmcnt - “boy snatched his crutch”

“got u p , piirsned him, and s o hecnme well”

A snake “healed the toe

Cured



16. “lame man” 17. Man sufkring from “a malignant sore i n his

with its tongue”

toe” 18. “blincl man”

19. Man with “no hair on

his head“ 20. “~3lintlboy”

1)reained “the got! came u p

“At d:tyl,reak he walked out

to

hiin and with his fingers opened his c y ~ ~ . ”

s o l I nd ”

god annointed “his head

His hair grew

with some drug” ‘ W r i l t . wide-awake Ire had

“Went ‘Iway healed.”

his eyes curctl b y one of the dogs i n the Teinpk.” ’Srcond I1;ilf of 4th century B.C. I n E. J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, I, PI). 229-

233.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

18

STAM AND SPANOS

are presented in Table 1 (from E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, I). As can be seen from Table 1, the nature of most of the cures highlights and validates the occurrence of healing dreams.” In short, the idea that gods appeared to men in dreams was a taken-for-granted aspect of Greek life. It was not considered rare or “miraculous” and its occurrence in the temples was reinforced by cultural lore, temple inscriptions, etc. “Special” explanations of healing dreams in terms of unusual states of suggestibility, hypnosis, or mental illness do nothing to enhance our understanding of this phenomenon. The details of the dream contents are also understandable, given the populace’s familiarity with medical theories and practice. The dreams often included herbal prescriptions, various “healthful” regimens (e.g., bathing in warm springs), and even directions for surgical procedures. It is important to keep in mind that medicine in antiquity was considered a craft, not an exclusive profession (L. Edelstein, 1952). For instance, a person needed no license or training to legally call himself a physician. His reputation was his only credential for practicing medicine (Amundsen, 1977; L. Edelstein, 1967). Moreover, there was no standard pharmacopoeia and remedies, dietetics, and surgical treatment were a matter of common knowledge. Rural areas were usually without physicians altogether and the lower classes literally healed themselves. Dreams are said to have often included prescriptions, and a regimen to be followed, and recovery, therefore, was not always immediate. It was the patients’ “everyday knowledge” about healing procedures that provided the contents of the dreams (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945; Kerknyi, 1947/ 1960; Phillips, 1973). The dream visions contained all manner of remedies considered efficacious in antiquity (cf. Allbutt, 1921). Furthermore, diseases were rarely specified nor were the lasting effects of the cures. Some testimonies admitted to failure and others did not even pretend to be cures (Behr, 1968). Thus, on the basis of the dream contents, little evidence is available to those who would argue for some “special”explanation of the reported cures. Certainly, nothing is gained (and parsimony is lost) by postulating “priest induced posthypnotic suggestions” as an explanation of the dream contents. “Outrageous treatments such as cutting the head off and replacing it after treatment, as found on Stele 11, were consonant with speculative medicine in ancient Greece (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11). The Hippocratic (460-377 B.C.)work Onjointscontains a passage on what might be done if one could operate as if the patient were a corpse and the head were removed (Hippocrates, 111, 1923, p. 293). Likewise a pregnancy of many years, as those in Stele I, Cases 1 and 2, (see Table 1). was not deemed impossible (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11). The question of their actual occurrence, however, is an altogether different matter.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS A N D HYPNOSIS

19

The Asclepian cult was an essential aspect of the Greek community (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945). As with other rituals in ancient Greece, however (e.g., the Delphic oracle), little dogma was created to interpret the beliefs implied by the healing ritual (Smith, 1965). These beliefs differed from locale to locale and changed substantially over time from carly to late antiquity (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945). Therefore, it is important that the dream healings be viewed in terms of their cultural context. Greek physicians had only limited success. They were reluctant to undertake treatments that were unlikely to be successful or to treat patients who were not sure to survive (Amundsen, 1977). Moreover, chronic diseases were usually 1,elieved to be incurable (Kudlien, 1967, 1973) and, therefore, were rarely treated by physicians. Finally, trained physicians were not available to the poor and to the rural populace (E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945). In short, the relation of Asclepius’s healings to Greek life and Greek medicine can be understood in terms of the social risks and economic threat of disease to the lower and middle classes (L. Edelstein, 1952, 1967). Physicians were hard to find in out of the way places, declined difficult cases, and were expensive. Illness meant a loss of livelihood for all but the rich. In summary, if ancient medicine is seen as it really was, if the treatment which it could provide is taken at its true value, the miracles of the god seem less miraculous -or else . . it was almost as miraculous that those who were taken care of by human doctors so often recovered [ E. J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, 1945, 11, p. 1721.

REFERENCES ALEXANDER, F.G., & SELESNICK, S.T. The history of psychiatry: An evaluation of psychiatric thought and practice from prehistoric times to the present. New York: Harper & Row, 1966. ALLBUTT, T.C. Greek medicine in Rome. London: Macmillan, 1921. AMUNDSEN, D.W. The liability of the physician in classical Greek legal theory and practice. Hist. Med. allied Sciences, 1977, 32, 172-203. ARISTOPHANES (448-380 B.C.) Plutus. In E.J. Edelstein & L. Edelstein, Asclepius: A collection and interpretation of the testimonies, (Vol. 1). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1945. BANYAI,E.I., & HILGARD,E.H. A comparison of active-alert hypnotic induction with traditional relaxation inductions. J . abnorm. Psychol., 1976, 85, 218-224. BARBER,T.X. Hypnosis: A scientijic approach. New York: Van Nostrand, 1969. BEHR, C.A. (Trans.).Aelius Aristides and the sacred tales. Amsterdam: Hakkert, 1968. BOLKESTEIN, H. -EV\IW Gastverblijf, pelgrimsherberg, armhuis. [Xenon: Guesthouse, pilgrims’ inn, poorhouse .] Mededeelingen der Koninklijke Akademie van Wetenschappen, Afdeeling Letterkunde, [Bulletin of the Royal Academy of Sciences, Department of Literature], 1937, 84, (3, Serial B), 107-146. BHEGER, L., HUNTER,I., & LANE,H.W. The effect of stress on dreams. New York: International Universities Press, 1971.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

20

STAM A N D SPANOS

BROMRKHG, W. The mind of inan: A history of psychotherapy and psychoanalysis. New York: Harper & Brothers, 1959. Buss, A. R. In defense of a critical-presentist historiography: The fact theory rt:lationship and Marx’s episternology. J . Hist. behav. Sciences, 1977, 13, 252-260. CESBORN,H. Histoire critique de l’hyst&rie.[A critical history of hysteria .I Paris: Asselin et Houzeau, 1909. CONN,J.H. Historical aspects of scientific hypnosis. J . clin. e x p . Hypnosis, 1957, 5 , 17-24. CONNOHS,J. R., & SHEEHAN,P.W. The influence of control comparison tasks and hctween-versus within-suhjects effects i n hypnotic responsivity. Inf . J . din. e x p . Hypnosis, 1978, 26, 104-122. DEUTSCH,A. The mentally ill in America: A history of their care and treatment from Colonial times. New York: Columbia Univer. Press, 1946. EDELSTEIN,L. Greek medicine in its relation to religion and magic. Bull. Inst. Hist. Med., 1937, 5, 201-246. EDELSTEIN,L. The relation of ancient philosophy to medicine. Bull. Hist. Med., 1952, 26, 299-316. EDELSTEIN,I,. The Hippocratic physician. In 0. Temkin & C.L. Temkin (Eds.), Ancient medicine: Selected papers of Ludwig Edelstein. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1967. Pp. 87-110. EDELSTEIN,E.J., & EDELSTEIN,L. Asclepius: A collection and interpretation of the testimonies. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1945. 2 vols. FISS, H. Current dream research: A psychobiological perspective. In B. B. Wolman, M . Ullman, & W.B. Webb (Eds.), Handbook of dreams: Research, theories and applications. New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold, 1979. Pp. 20-75. FHANK,J. D. Persuasion and healing: A comparative study of psychotherapy. (Rev. ed.) Baltimore: Johns Hopkins, 1973. GINDES,B.C. New concepts of hypnosis. New York: Julian, 1951. HERHLICH,S. Antike Wunderkuren: Beitrage zu ihrer beurteilung. /Ancient miracle cures: Contributions to their review.] Wissenschaftliche Beilage Zuni Jahresbericht des Humboldt - Gymnasiums zu Berlin, [The Scientijk Supplement of the Annual Report of the Humboldt- Gymnasiums of Berlin./ 1911, Programrn Nr. 68. HERZOG,R. Die Wunderheilungen von Epidauros. [The miracle healings .f Epidauros.] Philologus, (Supplement-band 22, Heft 3), Leipzig, 1931. HILGARD,E. R., & TART,C.T. Responsiveness to suggestions following waking and imagination instructions and following induction of hypnosis. I . abnorm. Psycho/ ., 1966, 71, 196-208. HIPP~CRATES. Hippocrates. (W.H.S. Jones, Trans.) Cambridge, Mass.: Loeb Classical Library, 1923-31. 4 vols. (460-377 B.C.) IIYMES, D. Notes toward a history of linguistic anthropology. Anthropol. Linguis., !%3, 5, 59-103. KERENYI, C. Asklepios: Archetypal image of the physician$ existence. (R. Manheim, Trans.). London: Thames & Hudson, 1960. (Orig. publ., 1947.) KITTO, H.D.F. The Creeks. Chicago: Aldine, 1951. KROGEH, W. S. Clinical and experimental hypnosis: In medicine, dentistry, and psychology. (2nd ed.) Philadelphia: Lippincvtt, 1976. KROGER, W.S., & FEZLER, W.D. Hypnosis and behavior modification: lmagery conditioning. Philadelphia: Lippincott, 1976. KUDLIEN, F. Der Beginn des medizinischen Denkens bei den Griechen oon Homer his Hippokrates. [The beginning of Greek medical thought from Homer to Hippocrates.] Zurich: Arternis Verlag, 1967. KUDLIEN, F. The old Creek concept of “relative” health. J . Hist. behao. Sciences, 1973, 9, 53-59. LECRON, L.M., & BORDEAUXJ. Hypnotism todoy. New York: Grune & Stratton, 1947.

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

ASCLEPIAN DREAM HEALINGS AND HYPNOSIS

21

LIVIUS,T. Lioy. (E.T. Sage & A.C. Schlesinger, Trans.) Book XL, Vol. 12. Cambridge, Mass.: Loeb Classical Library, 1964. (59 B.C.-17 A.D.) LUDWIG,A.M. An historical survey of the early roots of mesmerism. l n t . J . clin. exp. Hypnosis, 1964, 12, 205-217. LUDWIG,A.M., & LYLE, W.H., JR. Tension induction and hyperalert trance. J . abnorrn. soc. Psychol. 1964, 69, 70-76. MACHOVEC,F.J. Hypnosis before Mesmer. Amer. J . clin. Hypnosis, 1975, 17, 215220. MACHOVEC, F. J. The cult of Asklipios. Amer. J . d i n . Hypnosis, 1979, 22, 85-90. MARCUSE, F. L. Hypnosis: Fact andfiction. Baltimore: Penguin, 1959. MEIER, C. A. Ancient incubation and modern psychotherapy. Evanston: Northwestern Univer. Press, 1967. (Orig. Publ., 1949.) MORA, G. Mind-body concepts in the middle ages: Part I. The classical background and its merging with the Judeo-Christian tradition in the early middle ages. J . Hist. hehao. Sciences, 1978, 14, 344-361. PHILLIPS,E.D. Greek medicine. London: Thames & Hudson, 1973. PLATO.Plato: The republic. (P. Shorey, Trans.). Cambridge, Mass.: Loeb Classical Library, 1946. (427-347 B.C.) Quaestiones Romunae. In The Roman questions of Plutarch (Trans. with PLUTARCH. introductory essays and commentary by H. J. Rose). Oxford: Clarendon, 1924. (46-120 A. D.) PULOS, L. Mesmerism revisited: The effectiveness of Esdaile’s techniques in the production of deep hypnosis and total body hypnoanaesthesia. A m r . J . clin. Hypnosis, 1980, 22, 206-211. REGNIER, L. R. Hynotisme et croyances anciennes. [Hypnotism and ancient beliefs .] Paris: Bureaux du progr&smkdical, 1891. SHEEHAN, P.W., & PERRY,C.W. Methodologies of hypnosis: A critical appraisal of contemporary paradigms of hypnosis. Hillsdale, N. J.: Erlbaum, 1976. SIGERIST,H.E. A history of medicine. Vol. 2 . Early Greek, Hindu, and Persian medicine. New York: Oxford Univer. Press, 1961. SMITH,W. D. So-called possession in pre-Christian Greece. Transact. Proc. Amer. Philol. Ass., 1965, 96, 403-426. SPANOS,N.P. Witchcraft in histories of psychiatry: A critical analysis and an alternative conceptualization. Psychol. Bull ., 1978, 85, 417-439. SPANOS,N.P., & CHAVES,J.F. Converging operations and the “hypnotic state” construct. Proc. Amer. Psychol. Ass., 77th Annual Convention, 1969, 905-906. SPANOS,N.P., & GOTTLIER,J. Demonic possession, mesmerism, and hysteria: A social psychological perspective on their historical interrelations. J . abnorm. Psycho/ ., 1979, 88, 527-546. STOCKING, G.W. On the limits of ‘presentism’ and ‘historicism’ in the historiography of the behavioral sciences. J . Hist. behao. Sciences, 1965, I , 211-218. VEITH, I. Hysteria: The history of a disease. Chicago: Univer. of Chicago Press, 1965. VEITH, 1. The Fielding H. Garrison lecture, blinders of the mind: Historical reflections on functional impairment of vision. Bull. Hist. Med., 1974, 48, 503-516. VEITH, I. Four thousand years of hysteria. In M. J. Horowitz (Ed.), Hysterical personality. New York: Aronson, 1977. Pp. 7-93. VITRUVIUS, P. De Architectura (F. Granger, Trans.) Cambridge, Mass. : Loeb Classical Library, 1955-56. 2 vols. (first century, B.C.) H.F.Q. The influence of presleep suggestions on dream WALKER,P.C., & JOHNSON, content: Evidence and methodological problems. Psychol. Bull., 1974, 81, 362370. WEITZENHOFWH, A.M., & HILGAHD,E.R. Stanford Hypnotic Susceptibility Scttle, Forms A and B . Palo Alto, Calif:: Conslilting Psychologists Press, 1959, WITKIN,H. A . , & LEWIS,H. B. Presleep experiences and dreams. In H. A. Witkin & H. B. Lewis (Eds.), Experimental studies of dreaming. New York: Handom House, 1967. Pp. 148-201.

22

S’WM AND SPANOS

ZILBOORC,G . , &

HENRY,

G.W. A history of medical psychology. New York: Norton,

1941.

Die Traumheilungen des Askulap: Eine Kritik Henderikus J. Stam und Nicholas P. Spanos

Downloaded by [University of Calgary] at 20:41 14 June 2016

Abstrakt: Die vorliegende Abhandlung bewertet kritisch die populare Behauptung, dap die Traumheilungen, die in der Antike in Askulaptempeln vorkarnen, das Resultat von unwissentlichem Hypnosegebrauch waren. Diese Behauptung wurde als mangelhaft befunden, und es wird anstatt vorgeschlagen, dap diese berichteten Heilungen besser verstanden werden konnen, wenn man sie in ihrern kulturellen Kontext betrachtet.

Analyse des differences entre les cures par le r6ve des asckpieia et I’hypnose Henderikus J. Stam et Nicholas P. Spanos Resume: La presente etude critique I’idCe repandue voulant que les cures d e r6ve survenues durant I’antiquite dans les asckpieia resultaient d u n e utilisation non voulue de I’hypnose. Cette hypothese est rejetee. L e s auteurs soutiennent plutbt que les cures rapportees peuvent 6tre mieux comprises si on les replare dans leur veritable contexte culturel.

Anailisis de las diferencias entre la cura por 10s suenos de Asclepios y la hipnosis Henderikus J. Stam y Nicholas P. Spanos Resumen: El presente estudio critica una idea popular que sostiene que las curas de sueno que se efectuaban en la antigiiedad, en 10s templos de Asclepios, eran el resultado de una utilizacion involuntaria d e la hipnosis. Esta hip6tesis es rechazada; 10s autores sostienen, en cambio, que estas curas pueden ser mejor comprendidas si se tiene en cuenta el context0 cultural en el cual se desarrollaron.