214 E. GUENEY :

position : he has at most attempted to supplement the ordinary physiological doctrines as to the effect of ' fixation ' and ' monotonous stimulation ' by the conception of ' at- tention ' an attempt which has been misleading, in so far as it has implied that attention on the part of the ' subject ' (who may be an infant or a cray-fish) is a general condition of hypnotisation. Certain recent events, however, have given special importance to this topic of trance-induction or ' hypnogeny,' 1 and have raised in a startling form the question of the efficacy of psychical influence as a hypno- genetic agent. And this question naturally connects itself with a more general inquiry respecting ' specific influence ' and ' mesmeric rapport ' topics which, in my last paper, I noticed only to avoid, as not at that time coming within the most extended limits of scientific recognition, but which analysis may perhaps rob of some of their mystery, and which I am now at least justified in having described as lying " in the direct path of orthodox hypnotic experiment ". In the paper just referred to (MiND No. 36) I dwelt on the fact that the various processes by which hypnotic trance may be induced whether regarded in their physical aspects, as fixation of the eyes or gentle peripheral stimulation, or in their psychical aspects, as expectation or attention do little or nothing to explain the condition which ensues, inas- much as nothing that we know, outside hypnotism, would have led us to predict that the results would follow the pro- cesses ; so that the " profound nervous change," which Braid proclaimed as the immediate cause of the results, has still to be accepted as an ultimate fact. And I further drew attention to the peculiarity that the production of this pro- found nervous change seems, in the first instance, always to require some distinct physical stimulation ; 2 though, after it has once been induced, the mere idea of it, associated with that of the original hypnotiser e.g., if he gives the command 1 Dormez!' may be enough to cause its recurrence. So far as I am aware, no distinctly hypnotic condition has ever been originally induced by a mere idea or a merely emotional 1 This term is not a happy one, as it contains no indication of the funda- mental difference between hypnotic trance and ordinary sleep ; but it is difficult to think of a tolerable substitute. 2 An example recorded by Esdaile, who professes to have hypnotised a blind man for the first time by steadily gazing at him from a distance of 20 yards, would appear to be an exception. I admit the force of Esdaile's testimony ; but the account was not written till after he had frequently hypnotised the man, and it seems possible that his memory betrayed him as to the circumstances of the first experiment.