The Hysterical Victorian: My Theory on Why Hysteria Exploded in the late Nineteenth Century

I'd like to introduce my new segment The Hysterical Victorian, which will be focusing on all kinds of topics about the insane and hysterical because this is one of my specialties. My novel "A White Room" involved in-depth research into female hysteria, and I am very knowledgeable on the subject, which many people find crazily interesting so why not have a segment?

Public Domain Photo taken by Jean-Martin Charcot in 1878 during his experiments using hypnosis to treat hysteria patients.



For today's post, I'd like to share an opinion I have formed during my research on hysteria. For those of you who don't know much about hysteria, I highly recommend you watch my "vlog on The Yellow Wallpaper," but a quick definition - hysteria was a disease involving a variety of "nervous complaints." In the the late nineteenth century and turn of the century, hysteria was considered an epidemic among women. The condition was believed to be caused by the uterus wandering the body and causing emotional disturbances; however, the symptoms were so broad almost anything could lead to a diagnosis. Cures ranged from bed rest to sensory deprivation, the water cure, genital stimulation, admission into a lunatic asylum, or even removal of the reproductive organs, which is where we get our term hysterectomy.

Hysteria had been around for some time, but the amount of cases exploded during the late nineteenth century and turn of the century, but why?

One of the things that is well known about hysteria is that a lot of the women who were diagnosed were simply acting out, rebelling, or behaving in a manner that was unacceptable. Much of historical study has focused on the fact that many of these rebellious women were intentionally or unintentionally rebelling on behalf of women's rights. At this time, it was believed that women were naturally submissive, domestic, pure, and pious (the four values of the Cult of Domesticity). These values went beyond goals and were understood as a woman's natural place. When women didn't act in a way that was considered normal or natural, it was seen as a symptom.


But it wasn't just rebellious and revolutionary women who were diagnosed. Women who were actually suffering with depression, anxiety, and other real mental illnesses were also diagnosed too.

So back to the question, why were so many women diagnosed with hysteria at this time period?

Professor Jean-Martin Charcot demonstrates hypnosis on a "hysterical" patient. This image is in the public domain because it's copyright has expired.My opinion is that the diagnoses increased due to an increase in both rebellion and mental illnesses like depression and anxiety among women. Increased rebellion and many mental illnesses (like depression or anxiety) are in response to dissatisfaction in something. I believe that the unhappiness of rebellious women and increase in depression in women stemmed from the same thing. Their lives lacked meaning or purpose.

*A commenter pointed out that not all mental illnesses are in response to a stimulant but can be caused by chemical imbalances or other issues that are completely out of the patients control or environment. This is 100 percent true and I am not trying to include those cases in this theory. I am specifically referring to women getting depressed or having some other psychological problem in response to a factor in their lives.*

Prior to the Industrial Revolution, women were really important to the home. They had to make food from scratch, they had to make all the clothes, they educated the children, they provided home medicine, and did just about everything by hand. Their role in the home was extremely important and couldn't be done by others unless they were rich enough to pay people to do it.

However, with the Industrial Revolution, there came a variety of machines and new products that made life easier for women in the home, but that also diminished the importance of their roles. Women's skills were less important after factories started producing things like canned goods, washing machines, and clothing. Their roles had less meaning and value than in previous generations.

This was a slow transitional process that occurred in increments, but the overall result was that women were experiencing dissatisfaction with their current lots in life. It's obvious that women's rights fighters were born out of this dissatisfaction, but what isn't as obvious is that many women who were dissatisfied didn't see fighting for their rights as an option or didn't realize it would resolve their problems. These women grew depressed, anxious, or developed another type of mental disturbance that would lead to a diagnosis of hysteria.

Of course I'm not saying every single case of hysteria fit into these two generalities. What I am saying is that it is my opinion that the explosion in cases of hysteria was a reflection of the increase of unhappiness among women after their roles and primary purpose was diminished in the home. 

For further reading on this topic:

The New York Times: The Pseudoscience of Hysteria
Jean-Marcot Charcot
PubMed.gov on Hysterectomy a Historical Perspective
The Hysterical Female