CARVIEW

MOTORHOMES

Select Language

HTTP/2 301 server: nginx date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 07:19:40 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 location: https://maladiesofthemind.wordpress.com/miscellaneous/ x-hacker: Want root? Visit join.a8c.com/hacker and mention this header. host-header: WordPress.com link: ; rel="https://api.w.org/" vary: accept, content-type, cookie x-redirect-by: WordPress x-ac: 1.bom _dca MISS alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400 strict-transport-security: max-age=31536000 server-timing: a8c-cdn, dc;desc=bom, cache;desc=MISS;dur=330.0 HTTP/2 200 server: nginx date: Sun, 18 Jan 2026 07:19:41 GMT content-type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 vary: Accept-Encoding x-hacker: Want root? Visit join.a8c.com/hacker and mention this header. host-header: WordPress.com link: ; rel="https://api.w.org/" vary: accept, content-type, cookie link: ; rel=shortlink content-encoding: gzip x-ac: 1.bom _dca MISS alt-svc: h3=":443"; ma=86400 strict-transport-security: max-age=31536000 server-timing: a8c-cdn, dc;desc=bom, cache;desc=MISS;dur=493.0 Miscellaneous – Maladies of the mind

Miscellaneous

carview.php?tsp= — An array of mental disorders and treatments, (1720), Credit: rijksmuseum.

So many terms were used in the early modern period to refer to the mentally ill of society, ‘lunitic’, ‘crazed’, ‘frenzied’, ‘man-man’, to name just a few. Mental illness was then as is it is now a multifaceted subject, with links to various phenomena, a multitude of symptoms and outcomes and facing issues of stigmas and prejudice.

Hogarth’s Homeless

By Nicole Kenny

While this project mainly focuses on early modern mental health within the household, as it has been acknowledged in other posts, mental health was an extremely personal and domestic affair. This means that in order to understand this properly, it also has to be considered what the experiences were like for those who did not have a permanent home.

Homelessness is something, alongside my passion for history, that I devote a lot of my time to and feel extremely strongly about. Nowadays, homelessness is arguably at its highest level, since figures have been recorded, with the latest statistics revealing that 4,677 people were sleeping rough in a single night.^[1]

If homelessness is continuing to rise, this suggests that it would not necessarily have been much of a problem in the early modern period, but this was not the case. I remembered reading an article from The Guardiana while ago that incorporated an eighteenth-century painting and shed light on early modern homelessness. It is this painting in particular, ‘The Times of the Day: Night’ by William Hogarth, that exposes possibly the first painting of homelessness that was ever seen.^[2]

The picture itself depicts the busyness of London’s night life as the city was ever growing. The forefront of the picture is mainly dominated by the quarreling men and the cart that has caught on fire with the people trapped inside. However, these aspects of the painting almost completely mask the two people asleep underneath the window ledge of the surgeon’s house. The boy in very bottom left-hand corner of the painting, whose job it would have been to illuminate the streets for those walking by, actually illuminates the homeless people who are sleeping.

Homelessness today is a huge contributing factor for those who suffer with mental illness and I can’t imagine it would have been any different for those living without a home during the early modern period. For those who were homeless and experiencing mental health issues during this time, many would have been cast out onto the streets and left to fend for themselves. The alternative to this was being locked away in a ‘hospital’ such as Bedlam and used as a spectacle to be viewed by paying visitors or, as historians originally believed, being whipped repeatedly for their symptoms.

On the other hand, this view has been noted to have changed around the beginning of the eighteenth century and those who worked within hospitals such as Bedlam began to take a more sympathetic view towards those who were mentally ill and had no one else to care for them. While whipping and physical punishment was always discouraged within Bedlam, many believed it was the best way to correct those who were considered mad.^[3]

Therefore, for those who were homeless and suffering from mental illness in the early modern period their experience was more or less similar to those in the same situation today. There was accommodation available to them, but for most people whether homeless or not experiencing mental illness, the treatment was insufficient and more often than not they remained on the streets without a long-term solution out of poverty or a cure for their symptoms.

Self-Murder

By Lindsey Gosling

Warning: this blog post discusses issues of a sensitive nature.

During a visit to the University of Essex’s Special Collections, whilst pursuing a number of early modern household books, I came across the term ‘self-murder’ in George Cheyne’s A Treatise on Health and Long Life, (London, 1787), p. 142.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is special-collections-1-500x333.jpg — Credit: University of Essex Special Collections.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is treatise-self-murder-1.png — *George Cheyne,*
*A Treatise on Health and Long Life, (London, 1787) Credit: Archive.org.*

Self-murder or suicide as we know it today, was not something that had previously popped up during my studies, and therefore caught my attention. It got me thinking about what this term meant to those of early modern society, and how their understanding and reactions to it mirrored or differed from ours.

There has always been to a certain extent a perceived stigma surrounding mental health and suicide, and even up until the last few decades it has not been something openly spoken about, which could explain its lack of real presence in historical literature.

In the aforementioned treatise from the year 1787, Cheyne explicitly linked the occurrence of self-murder in Britain to the high frequency of chronical distempers, such as scurvy. He suggested that the British’s inability ‘to suffer patiently the lasting pains of chronical distemper’ resulted in their opting to take their life by means of suicide. This brief mention of suicide really sets the tone, that self-murder was understood by Cheyne at least, as a weakness of character.

I wanted to know more and upon further investigation I came across Michael MacDonald and Terence Murphy’s comprehensive investigation into the history of suicide, Sleepless Souls, (Oxford, 1990).They discuss how early modern responses and attitudes towards self-murder came full cycle. First hardening and then returning to a more sympathetic and tolerant view more in alignment with the ancient philosophies.

In Tudor and early Stuart England self-killing was not only a sin in the context of religion but also a criminal felony. This was due to its knock on effect within society, such as the family of a male self-murderer being unable to cope financially. This crime was taken very seriously and would be tried posthumously, with the heirs of the deceased being severely punished for their actions.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is ophelia-500x346.png — Sir John Everett Millais, *Ophelia*, (Surrey, 1852). Credit: Tate.org.uk.

Ophelia’s suicide in William Shakespeare’s Hamlet (London, 1589), although fictitious is one example that publicly illustrated how diverse the responses to suicide in the early modern period were. They were symptomatic to the legal, theological and popular attitudes of society.

Let us look at what had occurred in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries in order to bring about this complete transformation of opinion that MacDonald and Murphey talk about. They believe that political and religious changes have much to do with the increasing hostility towards suicide, specifically the Protestant Reformation. Protestant reformers preached that suicide was a terrible sin instigated by the devil and a crime against God.[1] In this sense it would be easy to see why attitudes towards self-murder changed, with religion being so deeply embedded within the heart of every early modern household.

George Abbot the then future archbishop of Canterbury spoke of suicide as being the very antithesis of Christian hope, ‘a sin so grieuous that scant any is more heinous unto the Lord’.[2] These sorts of opinions were reiterated and stressed in many other treatise, sermons and devotional works, really entrenching early modern society with this belief concerning suicide, despite the lack proofs supporting it within the bible.

A further notion regarding suicide preached by the clergy, was that self-murder actually came from God, as an act of retribution for sins committed. This argument was employed as a tool during the reformation as a way to promote one’s own church, and examples were used of Catholic persecutors of Protestants that went mad and then killed themselves.

Despite attitudes evidently becoming more hostile during the Protestant reformation, it is worth mentioning what the Catholic Church thought in regards to the act of self-murdering.

This image has an empty alt attribute; its file name is despair-327x500.jpg — Giotto Di Bondone’s *Seven Vices and Seven Virtues* (Padua, 1306). Credit: Web Gallery of Art.

According to Catholic teaching despair was a sin unforgivable, and suicide was the consequence of extreme despair, and was therefore one of the seven mortal sins. This belief would to a certain extent, contradict the view that the reformation had as much to do with the changing attitudes towards self-murder as first thought. The Catholic association of suicide and despair is clearly depicted in Giotto Di Bondone’s Seven Vices and Seven Virtues (Padua, 1306) found in the Cappella Scrovegni Chapel.

After 1660 a greater ecclesiastical, judicial and societal leniency towards self-murder was evident, the causes are more complex than those that contributed to the earlier hardening of attitudes. Much of it is owing to the English Revolution and its after effects upon local government and legal institutions.

The abolition of prerogative courts, the fall of censorship, and the rise of the new science enlightenment philosophy, all played their parts.[3] Many were in opposition to this relaxing of attitudes some even protested, nevertheless this was a time of cultural change and the lay persons opinions outweighed those in support of severity concerning self-murder.

The rise in literacy towards the end of the eighteenth century also enabled more to read the widely published defences of suicide, and it came to be regarded by many as a rational choice. Despite the law against self-murder not actually being changed until the nineteenth century, the use of it in court became increasingly suspended.

With suicide being ever present in our daily news as the biggest killer of men under 49, I felt it was important to see how over time attitudes to it have changed. Even in the early modern period acceptance and sympathy for the victims of self-murder won over the judicial and ecclesiastical attitudes of hostility. It is innate to sympathise with fellow human beings especially in their darkest times, nobody should ever feel ashamed or alone when suffering mental health issues.

Bibliography/Further Reading

Abbot, George, An Exposition Upon the Prophet Jonah, (London, 1600).

Bondone, Giotto Di, Desperatio, (Padua, 1306).

Cheyne, George, A Treatise on Health and Long Life, (London, 1787).

MacDonald, Michael & Terence R. Murphy, Sleepless Souls, (Oxford, 1990).

MacDonald, Michael, ‘The Medicalization of Suicide in England: Laymen, Physicians, and Cultural Change, 1500-1870’, in Framing Disease: Studies in Cultural History, eds. Charles E. Rosenberg, Janet Lynne Golden, (New Jersey, 1997).

Millais, Sir John Everett, Ophelia, (Surrey, 1852).

Mortality Analysis Team, ‘Suicides in the UK: 2017 registrations’, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/deaths/bulletins/suicidesintheunitedkingdom/2017registrations, Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/, [accessed 25/03/2019].

Murray, Alexander, Suicide in the Middle Ages, (Oxford, 1998).

Shakespeare, William, Hamlet, (London, 1589).

[1] MacDonald, Sleepless, p. 5.

[2] George Abbot, An Exposition Upon the Prophet Jonah, (London, 1600), p. 132.

[3] MacDonald, Sleepless, p.109.

Regal Maladies

By Shakor Paul

The benefit of researching a noble family for possible madness or hysteria is that they are heavily documented; more notably a royal family. A royal family is the central focus of each country; therefore, many of their activities are recorded. It can range from day-to-day activities such as their lunch to their behaviour when they’re suffering from madness. Madness in a royal family can be detrimental as all eyes are on them, especially if the royal member is the King or Queen.

George William Frederick or King George III had an extremely long reign as the English monarch from the years 1760 to 1820. His reign was marked by many military conflicts within Europe and the Americas. Referred to as the mad monarch who lost America George III suffered a few episodes of bipolar disorder during his reign moreover, he had blindness and possibly deafness during the latter part of this life. Although there no clear link between his bipolar, deafness and blindness it did not help his image as a mad king. George III inhered an unstable government and to a certain extent an unstable country. The seven-year war played a significant role under his reign, although the Anglo-Prusso-Portuguese coalition won, it massively increased the debt of the country. It led to eventually the loss of the American colonies as Britain saw the American colonies as a source of revenue to help alleviate the debt. The loss of the colonies in 1776 was the start of George III’s insanity in the coming years. He spent many years brooding over the loss of the colonies and fell out of favour with the British public. George III was born two months premature, however, from his childhood to adolescence and well into his middle-age life, he had rarely suffered any form of mental health issues.[1] The maladies of George III occurred during his first episode at age fifty. It was alleged He suffered from acute mania which lasted six months; this was his most well-known episode of mental issues. Although it was still heavily debated on what he suffered, it was clear it was some form of mental health disorder. Furthermore, there were many speculations on what George III had suffered, and he demonstrated wide ranges of disorders from deranged, erratic and aggressive behaviour. It was documented that he was aggressive to his servants and his own family although this was during the latter years of his life.

Acute mania was described as severe insanity in the 1800s; however, the use of terms differed throughout the 18th and 19th century. By 1870s lunatic asylums were well-established; but, there was no clear-cut explanation on the different types of mental health. Umbrella terms such as Mania, Melancholia, and Dementia were standard terms used during the 19th century and were used to diagnosis people with forms of mental health. Moreover, conditions such as dementia varied as a young adult with head injuries could be labelled as having dementia.[2] Mental health treatment was still in its infancy, most forms of mental health disorders were classified as some madness. Mental illness was a hardship for many families and was kept secret and lead to a stigma around mental health which is prevalent in our society today. Asylums were used as treatment facilities, but in reality, they locked up the patients and treated the patients in a terrible manner. George III perhaps suffered from senile dementia in his later years as he did show symptoms of it. Data taken from St. Lawrence’s hospital (mental asylum) demonstrates both dementia and schizophrenia amongst its patients. The first episodes of dementia for a young age can be compared to modern day schizophrenia while later in life shows senile dementia. It is possible that George III did suffer from senile dementia in his final years. He displayed common symptoms such as changes in mood or behaviour, difficulty performing tasks and poor or decreased judgement. King George’s behaviour was widely known, he could not concentrate on state affairs and could easily become upset and lash out. George III was suffering some form of mental health issues however, there is a misconception on what he had suffered. Although, his ‘madness’ was not an extreme form of mania he did go off the rails at specific points of his life. Eventually, this was widely known, and parliament passed a Regency Bill in where his heir will take over the crown when he had his episodes. The Regency Bill did not come in effect because George had recovered from one of his episodes

Comical cartoon of George III by Michael Hawkes

King George’s episodes consisted of agitation, incoherent speech and incidents of violence throughout the final years of his reign. The king used to often go off on a tangent when speaking, some instances the king would ramble on for hours until foam started to appear in his mouth. Modern psychiatrists, Macalpine and Hunter proposed that causes of King George’s mania were due to acute porphyria which is characterized by physical and mental disturbance.[3] Symptoms of porphyria can be mental changes, such as confusion, anxiety, hallucinations, paranoia or disorientation as well as, aches and pains. These are symptoms the king suffered so its plausible that King George’s insanity was caused by the disease which lead his senile behaviour in later years. However, research done in 2005 found that the king may have had high levels of arsenic which may have poisoned him over the years and leading to porphyria.[4] He also suffered from convulsions, which could arise from his arsenic poisoning. The convulsions he suffered were on the extreme side as it was reported his servants used to sit on him to keep him still. It is a convincing explanation of why the king suffered many episodes in his later as. The accumulation of arsenic could be an explanation of the symptoms of madness the king had faced as well as the convulsions he had suffered. Porphyria is a hereditary disease which may have been passed onto King George and thus leading in what some may call insanity. Moreover, it can be traced back to George’s ancestry as far back as Mary Queen of Scots. It is possible due to the many generations of interbreeding amongst the royal family, a rare disease such as Porphyria was passed on.[5]

Porphyria was the consensus historians had of King George, all the symptoms he had all pointed to severe mental instability. A long running play “The Madness of King George” by Alan Bennett used the porphyria to explain why George III became mad. As well as, the play was adapted into a film that was nominated for an Oscar. Evidence of the gene passing within the family is also plausible due to the royal inbreeding, rare diseases such as porphyria have a high chance occurring. Besides a new study has been completed to determine if porphyria played a significant role in King George’s and if there was another explanation to his mental health. A team used machine learning to scan thousands of George III’s handwritten letters.[6] The researchers examined letters before his major episodes and after his major episodes. The studies concluded when George III was ill he often repeated himself in the letters and elongated his sentences. The writing style of George III differed greatly, during his episodes the king used less rich vocabulary and his writing was not as good as before. Moreover, the researchers also studied his war-time letters and peacetime and machine learning found no differences. Therefore, it is clear even under war, George III behaviour did not change and the mental illness he suffered later was shown in his handwritten letters. It is similar when he had his episodes of rambling incoherently for hours. The evidence showcases patients seen today also experience the same writing and speech style, and they suffer bipolar disorder; acute mania is another term that can be used.

It is interesting to research a monarch who suffered from a mental illness, a person of such high authority and importance. As well as, during the 19^th century and how people dealt with a situation like this.

References:

[1] ‘George III | Biography, Madness, & Facts’, Encyclopedia Britannica <https://www.britannica.com/biography/George-III>.

[2] Simon A Hill and Richard Laugharne, ‘Mania, Dementia and Melancholia in the 1870s: Admissions to a Cornwall Asylum’, Journal of the Royal Society of Medicine, 96.7 (2003), 361–63.

[3] A. H. T. Robb-Smith, review of Review of George III and the Mad-Business, by Ida MacAlpine and Richard Hunter, The English Historical Review, 85.337 (1970), 808–10.

[4] Timothy M. Cox and others, ‘King George III and Porphyria: An Elemental Hypothesis and Investigation’, The Lancet, 366.9482 (2005), 332–35 <https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66991-7>.

[5] Robb-Smith.

[6] Vassiliki Rentoumi and others, ‘The Acute Mania of King George III: A Computational Linguistic Analysis’, PLOS ONE, 12.3 (2017), e0171626 <https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0171626>.

Further reading:

Gibbons, Brian, Back to the Future: Alan Bennett’s The Madness of George III and Shakespeare’s Kings (Presses Sorbonne Nouvelle, 2018)

Hibbert, Christopher, George III: A Personal History (London: Viking, 1998)

dir. Alan Bennet, The madness of George III, (1992)

dir. Nicholas Hytner, The madness of King George, (1994)

Mania – Madness

By Rebekah Weymouth-Shelton

In the early modern period mania was seemingly everywhere; madness was a fascination of English society. I found it particularly interesting to find mental illnesses was not only at the interest of those in the medical profession but also lay people. Doctors such as Richard Napier presented an alarming presence of madness in his couple of thousand diagnoses. Popular culture encouraged the attention madness had in the early modern period in England. The most significant examples of madness being very much in the public eye were Shakespeare’s Hamlet and King Lear. The understanding of madness in the aforementioned period was mania had symptoms of other mental illnesses such as delusions, melancholy and hallucinations. This knowledge is reflected in the modern definition of mania; madness, particularly of a kind characterised by uncontrolled, excited, or aggressive behaviour. [1]

The above representation of madness in this image shows it was possible to understand madness through many illnesses. This image also shows the isolating of those who were diagnosed or considered mad. Robert Burton attempted to apply categories to mental illnesses. The four categories were: 1. Diseases emanating from the body 2. Diseases of the head (Brain) 3. Madness (Mania) 4. Melancholy. [2] This framework ignores the complexity of mania and presents an oversimplified understanding in comparison to earlier works. Culpeper’s School of Physick 1659, gave the definition of madness to be ‘an inflammation of melancholy to the great fierceness and alienation of the mind’. [3] The identification of the link between mania and melancholy shows the interlinking of mental illnesses. Culpeper does go on to identify the differences between phrensy and mania, he also continues to list the various symptoms for mania presenting the difficulty in diagnosis and ultimately treatment.

In extreme cases mental illness would have often been justified through supernatural explanations. [4] This early modern view was a continuation from beliefs in the Middle Ages as madness was seen as the point between the human, the divine and the demonic. [5] In 1586 Timothy Bright’s Treatise of Melancholie signifies a slight movement away from demonic possession as a cause for mania and advances towards spiritual and physical causes and treatments. [6] Culpeper’s work in the seventeenth-century moves further away from the supernatural beliefs towards medical treatment. For madness Culpeper suggests a temperate air, liquid broths, and barley-water. [7] The works by Culpeper shows madness as sign for medical advances in the understanding of mania in the early modern period. There is the continuation of bodily fluids such as choler that are affected and in turn cause madness which presents a degree of biological justification for mental illnesses. Furthermore, the remedy for madness as presented by Culpeper suggests remedies for madness could still be being made in the home. Society’s interest in madness and the developments in medicine are interesting for the development in the understanding of mania.

[1] “mania, n.”. OED Online. March 2019. Oxford University Press. https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/113459?rskey=4gjSKM&result=1 (accessed May 6, 2019).

[2] Aleksandar Dimitrijevic, Being Mad in Early Modern England, (Nov. 2018), frontiers in psychology, https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2015.01740

[3] Nicholas Culpeper, Culpeper’s School of physick, or, The experimental practise of the whole art, (London, 1659), Historical Texts, p. 353.

[4] George Rosen, ‘The Mentally Ill and the Community in Western and Central Europe During the Late Middle Ages and the Renaissance’, Journal of the History of Medicine and Allied Sciences, 19 (1964), p. 384.

[5] Carol Thomas Neely, ‘’Documents in Madness’: Reading Madness and Gender in Shakespeare’s Tragedies and Early Modern Culture’, 42 (1991), Shakespeare Quarterly, p. 318.

[6] Timothy Bright, ‘A Treatise of Melancholie. Containing the causes there of with the phisicke cure and spirituall consolation for such a haue therefto adioyned and afflicted conscience’, (London, 1586), British Library https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/brights-treatise-of-melancholy-1586

[7] Nicholas Culpeper, Culpeper’s School of physick, or, The experimental practise of the whole art, (London, 1659), Historical Texts, p. 354.

Frenesie, Phrensy, Frenzy

By Rebekah Weymouth-Shelton

During the early modern period in England there was an ever growing interest in mental health. The interest in the anatomy of the human body coincided with advances in mental illnesses. I found the understanding of individual mental illnesses interesting as one mental illness become interlinked with other mental illnesses. The recognition of different illnesses resulted in different treatment and ultimately contributed to lay and professional understandings of mental health. This blog focuses on phrensy. The term phrensy was first used in 1340 and the term was adapted and changed, today the definition of phrensy is: The mental derangement; delirium, or temporary insanity; in later use the uncontrollable rage or excitement of paroxysm of mania. [1]

I have chosen to research later works from the early modern period to show the comparison between the earlier understandings of phrensy to the latest in the period. The consensus in the middle-ages and Renaissance was mental illnesses either had a biological or behavioural cause, whilst other believed the cause was demonic possession. [2] The later work in the early modern period shows there was a movement away from the demonic possession towards scientific justification. The treatise by P Frings specifically addresses the phrensy and criticising the Galenist views on phrensy. The difference in the symptoms, causes and treatments of phrensy show that although phrensy was recognised as an issue with the brain, the correct treatment was inconclusive.

In the Treatise the Galenist understanding of the cause of phrensy was choler. This view presented a clear ‘cause and effect’ opinion on phrensy. Choler was a bodily fluid most concerned with temperament (typically anger). The various degrees of choler was in proportion to the greater and lesser degrees of heat in the body and this related to a more violent or mild phrensy. The choler reaches the brain causing inflammation and this in turn affects the mind of the patient. [3] From a more spiritual origin, Galenists also had the view the animal spirit inside the body was linked to phrensy because vapours and heat surrounding the body affected them. Frings disagreed stating, ‘It is not the Province of those Vapours to cause sickly or infirm actions’.[4] Frings work moves rather swiftly away from the idea animal spirits were a cause for phrensy.

The connection between temperament and choler could have been justifiably associated to phrensy as a symptom of phrensy was anger. Frings does present there were other symptoms of phrensy also:

First, the Patient is very talkative, and too ready to enter unto all manner of Discourse, though not of such a Disposition before; her is very restless, and, if Sleep should steal upon him, it proves short and uneasy, and to be awake is painful to Him. [5]

Frings states in his Treatise it is easier to prevent than to save a patient from a phrensy, however with subtle signs in the early stages Frings is indicating the diagnosis of phrensy would have been difficult to know for family members. It would likely have not been until Frings’ second stage of phrensy others may have been able to see.

To twinkle with the Eyes, to have the Head-ach, those Symptoms shew that the Fever begins to attack the Brain, this will of course cause a Delirium.[6]

The fever is the only indication a patient is suffering specifically from phrensy in comparison to other mental illnesses. Edgar Sheppard’s Lectures on Madness in 1873 argues the relationship between phrensy and mania is highly dangerous to reason and to the life of persons with this diagnosis. [7] This shows the links made between different mental illnesses such as phrensy, mania; delirium and melancholy in the late early modern period were significant to the progress in understanding the severity of mental illnesses.

The Galenists believed in letting out blood to cure phrensy, as it drains the body of the choleric blood that was responsible for heating the brain. From a physicans opinion in the early modern period the blood was linked to everything therefore the Galenist view is not necessarily original as a cure for phrensy. [8] Frings disagrees stating ‘We omit several ridiculous Things which they make use of, on such Occasions; and say, that, as the Phrensy is but one Disorder, it only requires one Medicine’. [9] The presented cure for phrensy was the recognition of other relatable illnesses a patient may have had. Therefore showing phrensy would have been treated differently in relation to the individual patient. By the close of the early modern period in England there was an awareness of the complexity of mental illnesses, this mindfulness made way for further research into phrensy as well as other illnesses.

[1] “frenzy | phrenzy, n. and adj.”. OED Online. March 2019. Oxford University Press. https://www.oed.com/view/Entry/74509?redirectedFrom=phrensy (accessed May 09, 2019).

[2] S Kemp and K Williams, ‘Demonic possession and mental disorder in medieval and early modern Europe’, Psychological Medicine, 17 (1987), p. 21.

[3] P. Frings, A Treatise on Phrensy, (London, 1746), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pubId=eccoii-1655500800&terms=treatise%20of%20phrensy>.

[4] P. Frings, A Treatise on Phrensy, (London, 1746), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pubId=eccoii-1655500800&terms=treatise%20of%20phrensy>.

[5] P. Frings, A Treatise on Phrensy, (London, 1746), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pubId=eccoii-1655500800&terms=treatise%20of%20phrensy>.

[6] P. Frings, A Treatise on Phrensy, (London, 1746), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pubId=eccoii-1655500800&terms=treatise%20of%20phrensy>.

[7] Edgar Sheppard, Lectures on Madness Medical, Legal, and Social Aspects, (London, 1873), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pageId=ukmhl-b21923255-7&pubId=ukmhl-b21923255&terms=Edgar%20sheppard%20lectures>.

[8]Sarah Toulalan and Kate Fisher, The Routledge history of sex and the body: 1500 to the present, (Abingdon, 2013), p. 66.

[9] P. Frings, A Treatise on Phrensy, (London, 1746), Historical Texts, <https://data.historicaltexts.jisc.ac.uk/view?pubId=eccoii-1655500800&terms=treatise%20of%20phrensy>.