36 INSANITY IN THE LOWER ANIMALS. 



In this and similar cases we require statistics of a kind 

 similar to those that have been so carefully collected in con- 

 nection with human insanity. 



It so happens, however, that it remains to be determined 

 by proper statistics or data, whether savage or civilised man 

 is the more or less liable to insanity. The general belief is 

 that insanity is rare among savages, where mind is undeve- 

 loped or uncultivated ; while we know only too well how 

 frequent it is in civilised communities. But it may be infre- 

 quent in the former just because as in the case of insane 

 animals so soon as a savage becomes insane, and thereby 

 troublesome, dangerous, or useless, he is summarily destroyed. 

 From the evidence of many travellers, we know, on the one 

 hand, that such summary treatment is practised ; for instance, 

 by the Cunas Indians of Columbia, South America, among 

 whom f a female, who became insane, was hung from a tree 

 and burned ' (Brown) ; or by the Central African races, a 

 man belonging to whom petitioned Stanley for permission to 

 6 cut her head off at once ' with a drawn sword, the intended 

 victim being the man's own wife. 



On the other hand, among certain Eastern peoples for 

 instance, in Egypt, Syria, and Palestine, where idiots, imbe- 

 ciles and lunatics are protected by kindly superstition 

 these afflicted ones being invested with an odour of sanctity 

 various forms of insanity or idiocy are far from uncommon, 

 even on the public thoroughfares, where I have myself seen 

 them. 



But even as regards the same country the evidence of 

 travellers is very conflicting. Thus, as regards the Negroes 

 of Central Africa, some authors, such as Baker, describe 

 idiots and lunatics as extremely rare, if not absolutely un- 

 known ; while others, such as Speke, talk of them as by no 

 means infrequent. Nor can it be said to have been deter- 

 mined whether human insanity in our own country is more 

 prevalent in the uneducated inhabitants of rural districts, or 

 the highly- skilled, closely-pent artisans of crowded cities. 



Hitherto popular, as well as professional, opinion has been 

 altogether in favour of the view that considers the evils of 

 city life as far more potent in the production of disease, both 



