386 HYPNOTISM. 



or, if the subject be in a state of lethargy or cataleps}', by 

 gently rubbing the top of the head. The most characteristic 

 feature is, that though there is no neuro-muscular hyper- 

 excitability, as in the lethargic state, yet gentle stimulation 

 of the skin, as by blowing on it, or by stroking it, produces 

 a contraction of the underlying muscles, which differs from 

 that of the lethargic state, in that it does not give way on 

 excitation of the opponents, and from the cataleptic flexibili- 

 tas cerea in that they oppose a resistance if any attempt be 

 made to change the position of the limb. 



In considering these views, the most important point to 

 remark is, that they do not originate from suggestion ; and 

 also that the characteristic phenomena of each state — the 

 neuro-muscular hyperexcitability of the lethargic state, the 

 flexibilitas cerea of the cataleptic state, the increased cuta- 

 neous reflexes of the somnambulistic state — are physical, 

 that mental suggestion has nothing to do with their 

 production. 



As is well known, these views have met with the greatest 

 opposition. In the first place, Liebault, of Nancj^, in over 

 6,000 subjects never found these stages ; Wetterstrand, of 

 Stockholm, in 3,580 subjects never saw them ; again, even 

 at the Salpetriere they are very infrequent : Binet.and Fere 

 say that only two cases occurred in twelve years. In the 

 second place, now that we know, thanks to the Nancy school, 

 the great influence that psychical suggestion plays in pro- 

 ducing the phenomena of the hypnotic state, it is easy to see 

 into what pitfalls one may fall. Thus even the Salpetriere 

 school admit that the contraction of underlying muscles on 

 gentle stimulation of the skin in the somnambulistic state can 

 only be evoked by the hypnotiser ; this evidently shows that 

 the phenomenon is a psychical, not a physical reflex. Again, 

 the Salpetriere school rely on the insusceptibility to verbal 



