Depression Treatment of Autistic people in the Middle Ages vs now

Trauma

Trauma

Lost
Apr 3, 2022
44
The mentally ill were treated with much more compassion once upon a time.

Treatment of autistics in the middle ages, explained with a few stories :

"The first story comes from the early Middle Ages, the time of the Anglo-Saxon scholar Bede around 700 AD. Bede wrote about his saintly bishop St John of Beverley, that one day the bishop met a mother and son, the latter being nine years old and unable to speak. We don’t know whether this boy was autistic, but a lack of speech is a common enough condition among autistics, and the treatment of this boy probably tells us something about how autistic children might have been seen in the early Middle Ages.

Bishop John stopped and prayed for the boy. Then he spent some time after the prayer, teaching the boy to say the Anglo-Saxon words for “yes” and “no”. Once he had accomplished that, he passed the boy on to his retinue (accompanying priests and deacons) to teach the boy more.

Some of the things I notice here are: his parents had cared for him for nine years, despite his lack of speech — he was valued. Second, the bishop did not see him as anything other than an object for kindness — someone to bless and to help. He not only took time to teach the boy himself, but provided for further teaching and care. The Anglo-Saxon world does not seem to have been heartless in its treatment of obviously disabled children who might well have been autistic."

Now I wish I was living in that time.

Second story :

"A second story comes from later in the Middle Ages, from the time of St Francis of Assisi (early 1200s). Francis, having given up his career as a soldier and become a friar, accumulated a group of followers, spiritual brothers. One of these — Brother Juniper — is sometimes thought to have been autistic (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232936472_Asperger's_Syndrome_and_the_Holy_Fool_The_Case_of_Brother_Juniper). Brother Juniper was noted for unusual behaviour: single-minded, perhaps rigid, not always seeing the other person’s point of view, but very deeply committed to following St Francis. Especially if he was in fact autistic, he fitted a common medieval trope of the “fool for God”. It was expected of saintly people that their behaviour would appear odd by secular standards, and that was accepted. The saintly autistic person might then be accepted, with all their autistic “oddities” (from the non-autistic point of view), because they were holy.

This, by the way raises a further reflection. The Middle Ages had many opportunities for autistic people: monastic life, for example. There was no social pressure to get a girlfriend or boyfriend (quite the reverse in fact). You lived in seclusion, in a very structured routine of daily work and prayer. You might even have a vow of silence, at least no frivolous talk — so small talk was not required. Your work might be the meticulous and even artistic copying of manuscripts, something that quite a few autistics would excel at. You might be taught to read and research the classics held in your monastic library. It might be more autistic-friendly than the modern social world of “be popular, sell yourself."

These people found acceptance within their communities despite all their disabilities, and they lived good lives.

Now the real question, how are autistics treated now?


Fuck this world.
 
AI-cel

AI-cel

Hikkikomori
Dec 8, 2022
4,187
well even today there's a term called "gods people". So religious people treat them good. Being autistic means you get protection from entire village/city
 
cozyneet

cozyneet

NEET
Mar 15, 2023
75
The mentally ill were treated with much more compassion once upon a time.

Treatment of autistics in the middle ages, explained with a few stories :

"The first story comes from the early Middle Ages, the time of the Anglo-Saxon scholar Bede around 700 AD. Bede wrote about his saintly bishop St John of Beverley, that one day the bishop met a mother and son, the latter being nine years old and unable to speak. We don’t know whether this boy was autistic, but a lack of speech is a common enough condition among autistics, and the treatment of this boy probably tells us something about how autistic children might have been seen in the early Middle Ages.

Bishop John stopped and prayed for the boy. Then he spent some time after the prayer, teaching the boy to say the Anglo-Saxon words for “yes” and “no”. Once he had accomplished that, he passed the boy on to his retinue (accompanying priests and deacons) to teach the boy more.

Some of the things I notice here are: his parents had cared for him for nine years, despite his lack of speech — he was valued. Second, the bishop did not see him as anything other than an object for kindness — someone to bless and to help. He not only took time to teach the boy himself, but provided for further teaching and care. The Anglo-Saxon world does not seem to have been heartless in its treatment of obviously disabled children who might well have been autistic."

Now I wish I was living in that time.

Second story :

"A second story comes from later in the Middle Ages, from the time of St Francis of Assisi (early 1200s). Francis, having given up his career as a soldier and become a friar, accumulated a group of followers, spiritual brothers. One of these — Brother Juniper — is sometimes thought to have been autistic (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232936472_Asperger's_Syndrome_and_the_Holy_Fool_The_Case_of_Brother_Juniper). Brother Juniper was noted for unusual behaviour: single-minded, perhaps rigid, not always seeing the other person’s point of view, but very deeply committed to following St Francis. Especially if he was in fact autistic, he fitted a common medieval trope of the “fool for God”. It was expected of saintly people that their behaviour would appear odd by secular standards, and that was accepted. The saintly autistic person might then be accepted, with all their autistic “oddities” (from the non-autistic point of view), because they were holy.

This, by the way raises a further reflection. The Middle Ages had many opportunities for autistic people: monastic life, for example. There was no social pressure to get a girlfriend or boyfriend (quite the reverse in fact). You lived in seclusion, in a very structured routine of daily work and prayer. You might even have a vow of silence, at least no frivolous talk — so small talk was not required. Your work might be the meticulous and even artistic copying of manuscripts, something that quite a few autistics would excel at. You might be taught to read and research the classics held in your monastic library. It might be more autistic-friendly than the modern social world of “be popular, sell yourself."

These people found acceptance within their communities despite all their disabilities, and they lived good lives.

Now the real question, how are autistics treated now?


Fuck this world.
The society was more Christian then. The guy who had compassion was Christian.
 
NekoRightsActivist

NekoRightsActivist

NEET
Jan 25, 2023
1,316
bluh autists back then weren't forced to be dealing with strangers as they would have to nowadays.
 
Lain

Lain

NEET
Jul 19, 2021
3,371
Rural
Rural1


>it was generally agreed that the king should have perpetual wardship of such persons

It doesn't seem very pleasant to me. You're likely high functioning autist (or you wouldn't be here) so you wouldn't be viewed as autistic at all and would be like anyone else (likely toiling long hours in the sun or dying in wars). What's stopping you from the monastic life today? Do you sincerely think low functioning autists, retards, schizos, etc were treated whatsoever kindly by their peers when they were young? This age is just about the best for autists. You can get neetbux, you can find low functioning autists on the net, probably get laid with a fellow autist if you put in the time to find them and so on... all which would be virtually impossible if you were a low functioning autist back in the medieval ages.
 
Lain

Lain

NEET
Jul 19, 2021
3,371
Although, as the picture I linked stated, it could've been that everyone else was too retarded to really complain or notice. Not much of a good situation to be in. Most people were illiterate and you'd likely be too.
 
Lain

Lain

NEET
Jul 19, 2021
3,371
>Literacy rates in Western European countries during the Middle Ages were below twenty percent of the population.
>From the 1500s onward, till around the year 1800, life expectancy throughout Europe hovered between 30 and 40 years of age.
>Common diseases were dysentery, malaria, diphtheria, flu, typhoid, smallpox and leprosy.
>Before the invention of printing (1450-1500), the number of books in Europe could be counted in thousands.

oh but muh heckin monastic life :feelskek:
 
Aedra

Aedra

NEET
Nov 26, 2020
1,869
It doesn't seem very pleasant to me. You're likely high functioning autist (or you wouldn't be here) so you wouldn't be viewed as autistic at all and would be like anyone else (likely toiling long hours in the sun or dying in wars). What's stopping you from the monastic life today? Do you sincerely think low functioning autists, retards, schizos, etc were treated whatsoever kindly by their peers when they were young? This age is just about the best for autists. You can get neetbux, you can find low functioning autists on the net, probably get laid with a fellow autist if you put in the time to find them and so on... all which would be virtually impossible if you were a low functioning autist back in the medieval ages.
Bad arguments simply due to the fact that you're neglecting this ; Medieval society wasn't a shit tier thing like you're making it out to be. Okay, so many people lived in rural areas, these were closely related communities of maybe 150 people at most, you grew up with people who knew you from your childhood, how do you treat someone you've known all your life? Medieval autists had no problem with finding a spouse, the Kingdom of Jerusalem even saw a king who had leprosy, namely Baldwin the IV.
>Literacy rates in Western European countries during the Middle Ages were below twenty percent of the population.
You're neglecting the fact that one had to be literate in latin to be counted as literate in medieval society, latin had the same status as english does today, and it allowed university students from, let's say France to talk to other university students from any part of Europe that was connected to Christendom and ultimately the Catholic Church. Literacy rates in the Eastern Roman Empire was around 20-25 percent, which was good by medieval standards. You can't expect them to be fully literate in an age without the printing press.

And yes, universities are a medieval invention, the Church established universities, before that there were Cathedral Schools, once again established by the Church. There is evidence of teaching in Oxford University as far back as 1096 AD.
>From the 1500s onward, till around the year 1800, life expectancy throughout Europe hovered between 30 and 40 years of age.
Doesn't matter, average life expectancy was indeed around 30-40 but that's the figure you get when you take in account the infant mortality rate. A lot of babies died in child birth or during the first few years of their lives, which brings down the average life expectancy, it doesn't mean the average person dropped dead in their 30's, if you made it past the age of 5, you'd most likely see your 60's, this is an established fact.
Also, the fact that you said ''from the 1500's to 1800's'' shows you probably don't even know what ''medieval'' means, the middle ages are specifically defined as the years between 476 AD to 1453 AD, meaning the 1500's are not part of the middle ages, that's the early modern period.

>Common diseases were dysentery, malaria, diphtheria, flu, typhoid, smallpox and leprosy.
People have this thing called immune system, and their immune system was far stronger than the modern man's because the food they ate was organic and healthy unlike the mass produced goods of today. Medieval hospitals also existed, especially flourishing in The Kingdom of Jerusalem.

The Knights Hospitaller was exactly what it says on the name ; A group of knights who also happened to be medics and doctors, besides their military operations they also cared for the poor and the sick in their various establishments, and there were many orders dedicated to such things all throughout medieval Europe.

While we concentrate our observation on the Medieval Catholic church and contemplate the taxes it drew from the population (the term tithe implies “one tenth” or 10% church tax), we tend to forget that the Catholic Church not only did shear its sheep but also fed, healed and protected them. The Church was the universal social services system - including schools, social security, hospitals and nursing homes. The State concentrated on warfare.
>Before the invention of printing (1450-1500), the number of books in Europe could be counted in thousands.
True, because every single book had to be written by hand.
Full scale wars were not very common during the middle ages, the only two examples of full scale wars I can think of are The Mongol Conquests and the Hundreds Years war, the Mongol Conquests did not affect Europe because they never managed to conquer Europe, the hungarians and poles drove them back, and the Hundred Years war happened towards the end of the middle ages.

Mass conscription was also not a thing during medieval times, meaning your average peasant wouldn't have to fight in any wars during his life, instead European armies were made up of knights who were nobles by birth and were raised from childhood to be soldiers, wars were the profession of the elite, not the common man.

Full scale wars came after the middle ages, such as The Thirty Years war, WW1, WW2 and so on. Also the most brutal war in history was WW2.
(likely toiling long hours in the sun
Pre-industrial workers did not work very long hours, the worst working conditions were in the 19th century.
Although, as the picture I linked stated, it could've been that everyone else was too retarded to really complain or notice. Not much of a good situation to be in. Most people were illiterate and you'd likely be too.
Medieval people were human beings who thought and reasoned like we do today, this comment you made here seems like you're drawing from the pop-culture view of medieval society which doesn't have any basis in actual history, they may have been ignorant, but they were not retarded or stupid. There's a difference between being stupid and being ignorant.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Lain

Lain

NEET
Jul 19, 2021
3,371
Bad arguments simply due to the fact that you're neglecting this ; Medieval society wasn't a shit tier thing like you're making it out to be. Okay, so many people lived in rural areas, these were closely related communities of maybe 150 people at most, you grew up with people who knew you from your childhood, how do you treat someone you've known all your life? Medieval autists had no problem with finding a spouse, the Kingdom of Jerusalem even saw a king who had leprosy, namely Baldwin the IV.

You're neglecting the fact that one had to be literate in latin to be counted as literate in medieval society, latin had the same status as english does today, and it allowed university students from, let's say France to talk to other university students from any part of Europe that was connected to Christendom and ultimately the Catholic Church. Literacy rates in the Eastern Roman Empire was around 20-25 percent, which was good by medieval standards. You can't expect them to be fully literate in an age without the printing press.

And yes, universities are a medieval invention, the Church established universities, before that there were Cathedral Schools, once again established by the Church. There is evidence of teaching in Oxford University as far back as 1096 AD.

Doesn't matter, average life expectancy was indeed around 30-40 but that's the figure you get when you take in account the infant mortality rate. A lot of babies died in child birth or during the first few years of their lives, which brings down the average life expectancy, it doesn't mean the average person dropped dead in their 30's, if you made it past the age of 5, you'd most likely see your 60's, this is an established fact.
Also, the fact that you said ''from the 1500's to 1800's'' shows you probably don't even know what ''medieval'' means, the middle ages are specifically defined as the years between 476 AD to 1453 AD, meaning the 1500's are not part of the middle ages, that's the early modern period.


People have this thing called immune system, and their immune system was far stronger than the modern man's because the food they ate was organic and healthy unlike the mass produced goods of today. Medieval hospitals also existed, especially flourishing in The Kingdom of Jerusalem.

The Knights Hospitaller was exactly what it says on the name ; A group of knights who also happened to be medics and doctors, besides their military operations they also cared for the poor and the sick in their various establishments, and there were many orders dedicated to such things all throughout medieval Europe.

While we concentrate our observation on the Medieval Catholic church and contemplate the taxes it drew from the population (the term tithe implies “one tenth” or 10% church tax), we tend to forget that the Catholic Church not only did shear its sheep but also fed, healed and protected them. The Church was the universal social services system - including schools, social security, hospitals and nursing homes. The State concentrated on warfare.

True, because every single book had to be written by hand.

Full scale wars were not very common during the middle ages, the only two examples of full scale wars I can think of are The Mongol Conquests and the Hundreds Years war, the Mongol Conquests did not affect Europe because they never managed to conquer Europe, the hungarians and poles drove them back, and the Hundred Years war happened towards the end of the middle ages.

Mass conscription was also not a thing during medieval times, meaning your average peasant wouldn't have to fight in any wars during his life, instead European armies were made up of knights who were nobles by birth and were raised from childhood to be soldiers, wars were the profession of the elite, not the common man.

Full scale wars came after the middle ages, such as The Thirty Years war, WW1, WW2 and so on. Also the most brutal war in history was WW2.

Pre-industrial workers did not work very long hours, the worst working conditions were in the 19th century.

Medieval people were human beings who thought and reasoned like we do today, this comment you made here seems like you're drawing from the pop-culture view of medieval society which doesn't have any basis in actual history, they may have been ignorant, but they were not retarded or stupid. There's a difference between being stupid and being ignorant.
I don't have the amphetamines required to debate (and I'm sick so even if I did I wouldn't bother to reply to this entire wall of text like some redditor arguing) the point I was trying to convey ultimately is that you look at the past like an old man looks at the so called "golden days" and pretends like all was swell while ignoring all the shit that really happened. There will always be negatives in any age but especially more the further you go back in past. There is so many advances in every possible field known to mankind and you take it for granted entirely, instead worshipping an ideal that you've created in your head of what the world was like 1000 years ago based off a few examples you cherrypicked. You can do anything that you could've done in the past, you aren't forced to sell yourself in any particular manner, you could go and enjoy the monastic life right now if you so felt like it, instead of arguing with people on the internet about this or that.

This whole doom and gloom mentality towards the present world is because people are in too much luxury, they have to make up things to complain about to give them some jolt. At any moment you could read from a library that would mog the biggest libraries in medieval Europe 10000 fold. You're relaxing in the AC, probably with a full belly, probably after spending all day lazing inside enjoying your hobbies, complaining about how the world is so unfair and how if only you could be a peasant 1000 years ago everything would be ok. It's insane, go be a monk or stfu honestly about fake problems :feelslol:
 
Aedra

Aedra

NEET
Nov 26, 2020
1,869
I don't have the amphetamines required to debate (and I'm sick so even if I did I wouldn't bother to reply to this entire wall of text like some redditor arguing) the point I was trying to convey ultimately is that you look at the past like an old man looks at the so called "golden days" and pretends like all was swell while ignoring all the shit that really happened. There will always be negatives in any age but especially more the further you go back in past. There is so many advances in every possible field known to mankind and you take it for granted entirely, instead worshipping an ideal that you've created in your head of what the world was like 1000 years ago based off a few examples you cherrypicked. You can do anything that you could've done in the past, you aren't forced to sell yourself in any particular manner, you could go and enjoy the monastic life right now if you so felt like it, instead of arguing with people on the internet about this or that.

This whole doom and gloom mentality towards the present world is because people are in too much luxury, they have to make up things to complain about to give them some jolt. At any moment you could read from a library that would mog the biggest libraries in medieval Europe 10000 fold. You're relaxing in the AC, probably with a full belly, probably after spending all day lazing inside enjoying your hobbies, complaining about how the world is so unfair and how if only you could be a peasant 1000 years ago everything would be ok. It's insane, go be a monk or stfu honestly about fake problems :feelslol:
Okay, so you have no counter arguments and are only interested in judging me for idealizing something, good to know.
 
Activity
So far there's no one here

Similar threads

Late 2000s Muttcel
Replies
7
Views
107
Late 2000s Muttcel
Late 2000s Muttcel
Magonia
Replies
6
Views
446
Magonia
Magonia
Aedra
Replies
18
Views
724
Aedra
Aedra
Top