The Nancy school: Liébeault, Bernheim, and suggestion

The Nancy school is the usual name for the suggestion account of hypnosis developed at Nancy in the 1860s–80s; first in Ambroise-Auguste Liébeault’s practice, then in Hippolyte Bernheim’s faculty clinic. It is the rival to Charcot’s Salpêtrière, not a modern trial programme.

Key evidence

Liébeault’s Du sommeil et des états analogues, considérés surtout au point de vue de l’action du moral sur le physique (Paris: V. Masson et fils, 1866) is on Gallica. The title states the claim: induced sleep and like states, studied as the action of the moral on the physical. Bernheim later named this volume as Liébeault’s first published researches.

Bernheim’s Suggestive Therapeutics: a treatise on the nature and uses of hypnotism is Christian A. Herter’s English translation of the second French edition of De la suggestion et de ses applications à la thérapeutique (G. P. Putnam’s Sons; Bernheim’s prefaces June 1886 and November 1887; translator’s preface 9 July 1888). The Archive.org scan is that Putnam edition. Catalog metadata on that item says “1880”; the prefaces do not.

From those pages, Nancy’s argument is short:

• Suggestion, not a magnetic fluid, is “the key to Braidism” and “the key to all hypnotic phenomena.”
• Hypnotic sleep is not a neurosis analogous to hysteria. Catalepsy, transfer, and contracture are treated as psychical effects of suggestion.
• Liébeault, “Doctor of Medicine at Nancy,” is credited for the method Bernheim used to induce sleep and for first applying suggestion therapeutically. Bernheim writes that he began, sceptically, after Dumont presented four subjects to the Society of Medicine at Nancy on 10 May 1882.
• Charcot’s three-phase grand hypnotisme (lethargy, catalepsy, somnambulism) is something Bernheim says he could not reproduce in “several hundred” of his own cases, nor had Liébeault in the practice Bernheim reports. He treats the one Salpêtrière-trained subject who showed the three phases as a product of training and imitation.

Braid’s 1843 naming is the English-language break with Mesmer. Nancy is the French suggestion school that claimed that lineage against Paris neurology. Freud sat in Charcot’s theatre first; the later laboratory argument about measurement is Hilgard.

Limitations

Bernheim’s hospital counts and Liébeault’s case practice are nineteenth-century clinical reports. They are not CONSORT trials and they are not a grade for later clinical trials.

What we don't know yet

How much of the Salpêtrière three-phase picture was iatrogenic, and how much Nancy flattened real neurological variety, is still a historian’s argument. It does not settle a modern evidence grade.

This page is informational only.