Hippolyte Bernheim and the Nancy School (2026)

Gérard Fitoussi
Private practice; Association Francaise d’hypnose  (French Hypnosis Association)

Correspondence: drgerardfitoussi@yahoo.fr

Keywords: Hippolyte Bernheim; Nancy School; hypnosis; suggestion; history of hypnosis

Around 1900, Hippolyte Bernheim, professor of medicine in Nancy, France, was generally regarded as “the most eminent psychotherapist in Europe” (Ellenberger, 1994, p. 122). At that time, however, he spoke out against animal magnetism (C. Bernheim, 2011, p. 54).

With A. A. Liébeault, a physician, Henry Beaunis (1830-1921), a physiologist, and Jules Liégeois (1833-1908), a professor of law, Bernheim formed what came to be known as the Nancy School.

In 1878, Bernheim became intrigued by the cure achieved by Dr. Liébeault, a rural general practitioner, in one of his patients suffering from persistent sciatica. He met Liébeault, discovered his method, and came away enthusiastic (Klein, 2010).

Bernheim became most famous for his dispute with the Paris or Salpêtrière School, led by the world-renowned physician, Jean-Martin Charcot.

Henry Beaunis, in his Memoirs, pronounced that the Nancy and Paris Schools agreed only on two points, “a negation and an affirmation. The denial, the unreality of the phenomena observed by Charcot and described by the Paris/Salpêtrière School (which maintained that only hysterics were hypnotizable). For us, these phenomena were solely due to unconscious suggestions. An affirmation, the power of suggestion, and its use in therapy. On almost everything else, our ideas differed” (these words, from Beaunis’ unpublished Memoirs, were cited by Turbiaux, 2007, p. 160).

This disagreement between the two schools gave rise to a scientific controversy in which many physicians of the time took part.

Pierre Janet and Freud “sided with the Paris/Salpêtrière School, whereas the Russians, Nikolaev and Pavlov aligned themselves with the views of the Nancy School” (Chertok, 1965, pp. 31–32). Bernheim asserted that “there is no hypnotism, only suggestion” (Chertok, 1965, p. 49). For him, “hypnosis is a state of imposed suggestibility, provoked by suggestion” (Ellenberger, 1994, p. 121).

“It is the idea, conceived by the operator, which, seized by the hypnotized person and accepted by his brain, produces the phenomenon, thanks to an exalted suggestibility, generated by the special concentration of mind in the hypnotic state. Suggestion is the key to Braidism” (Bernheim, 1886/2005, Avant-Propos, p. I).[1]

In 1884, Bernheim published De la suggestion dans l’état hypnotique et dans l’état de veille (On suggestion in the hypnotic state and in the waking state). In it, he set forth Liébeault’s method and its clinical applications. The book achieved wide circulation and was translated into German by Freud (1856-1939) as early as 1888.

In 1886, Bernheim published De la suggestion et de ses applications à la thérapeutique (On suggestion and its therapeutical applications), a second edition of his earlier work under a new title (Bernheim, 1886/2005).

In My Life and Psychoanalysis, Freud recalled his visit to Nancy in the summer of 1889. Freud spent several weeks at Nancy, where he “witnessed Bernheim’s astonishing experiments on his hospital patients… and where he received his “strongest impressions concerning the possibility of powerful psychic processes that nevertheless remained hidden from human consciousness.” (Barrucand, 1986, pp. 163-164).

Bernheim highlighted the possibility of creating false memories. “Once awakened, the patient will believe he has seen or done what the hypnotist suggested to him” (Ellenberger, 1994, p. 148).

Bernheim also took part in controversies concerning crimes allegedly committed under hypnosis, including the Chambige affair and, later, the Bompard affair, in which he was called upon as an expert (C. Bernheim, 2011, p. 146).

“The Nancy School unanimously believed in the possibility of such crimes” (Ellenberger, 1994, p. 198). Bernheim was also the first to acknowledge the contributions of Abbé de Faria (Bernheim, 1886/2005).

More broadly, the Nancy School included “Albert Moll and Schrenck-Notzing in Germany, Krafft-Ebing in Austria, Bechterev in Russia, Milne Bramwell in England, Boris Sidis and Morton Prince in the United States” (Ellenberger, 1994, p. 121).

Conclusion

In summary, Hippolyte Bernheim and his colleagues in the Nancy School transformed the field of hypnosis. In their opposition to the Paris School, they insisted on the role of suggestion and suggestibility and disputed the assumption that only hysterics can be hypnotized. In the long term, the Nancy School prevailed.

[1] Braidism here refers to the hypnotic interventions developed and published by the Scottish physician, James Braid (1843).

AI use disclosure: AI was used for editorial formatting, English-language proofreading of the manuscript, and the adaptation of references to the requested style. The author remains responsible for the accuracy of the content and bibliographic references

References

Barrucand, D. (1986). Freud et Bernheim. [Freud and Bernheim]. Histoire des sciences médicales, 20(2),157-170. https://numerabilis.u-paris.fr/ressources/pdf/sfhm/hsm/HSMx1986x020x002/HSMx1986x020x002x0157.pdf

Bernheim, C. (2011). Hippolyte Bernheim, un destin sous hypnose. [Hippolyte Bernheim, A destiny under hypnosis]. Les éditions Hugo & Cie.

Bernheim, H. (2005). De la suggestion et de ses applications à la thérapeutique. [Regarding hypnosis and its applications to therapy]. (S. Nicolas, Ed.). L’Harmattan. (Original work published 1886).

Braid, J. (1843). Neurohypnology or the rationale of nervous sleep: Considered in relation with animal magnetism. John Churchill.

Chertok, L. (1965). L’hypnose. [Hypnosis]. Payot.

Ellenberger, H.F. (1994). Histoire de la découverte de l’inconscient [The history of the discovery of the unconscious]. (J.Feisthauer, trans.). Fayard.

Klein, A. (2010). Nouveau regard sur l’École hypnologique de Nancy à partir d’archives inédites. [A new perspective on the Nancy School of hypnosis based on previously unpublished archives]. Le Pays lorrain, 91(4), 337–348. https://hal.science/hal-00984438/document

Turbiaux, M. (2007). En marge de la querelle de l’hypnose, Henry Beaunis et l’affaire Cadiou. [On the sidelines of the hypnosis controversy, Henry Beaunis and the Cadiou affair]. Bulletin de psychologie, 488(2), 159–169.  https://doi.org/10.3917/bupsy.488.0159