Vesa Hirvonen Mental Disorders in Late Medieval Philosophy and Theology 1. Introduction There was a time when it was quite commonly believed that the medieval discussions on mental disorders were dominated by witchcraft and demonology. As a matter of fact, this view survived until the 1980s, especially in general histories of medicine.1 This is despite the fact that, since the 1930s, there have been a lengthy series of studies concentrating on various aspects of medieval theories of mental disorders, giving much more balanced view of them. With respect to medieval philosophers and theologians, Thomas Aquinas’s theory of mental disorders has been investigated in at least two monographs: E.E. Krapf’s Thomas de Aquino y la psicopatologia,2 and Jacques Simonnet’s Du concept de maladie mentale chez saint Thomas d’Aquin.3 In addition, there have been several articles dealing with it: Paul Kopp’s “Psychiatrisches bei Thomas von Aquin. Beiträge zur Psychiatrie der Scholastik II” (1935),4 Gottfried Roth’s “Thomas von Aquin in der neueren und neuesten Psychiatrie” (1960),5 and Jacques Simonnet’s “Folie et notations psychopathologiques dans l’oeuvre de Saint Thomas d’Aquin” (1983).6 Albert the Great’s conception of mental disorders has been studied in Paul Kopp’s article “Psychiatrisches bei Albertus Magnus. Beiträge zur Psychiatrie der Scholastik I” (1933),7 and Peter of Spain’s conception in Heinrich Schipperges’s article “Zur Psychologie und Psychiatrie des Petrus Hispanus” (1961).8 Medieval philosophical and theological theories of mental disorders have also been discussed in larger monographs giving an overall view of medieval madness theories, for example, Thomas F. Graham’s Medieval Minds. Mental Health in the Middle Ages (1967),9 H.H. Beek’s De geestesgestoorde in de Middeleeuwen: beeld en bemoeienis (1969),10 1 Discussion on this, see Kroll (1973); Kroll & Bachrach (1984), (1986); Kemp (1990) 112–114. 2 Krapf (1943). See also Kraus (1971). 3 Simonnet (1971). 4 Kopp (1935). 5 Roth (1960). 6 Simonnet (1983). 7 Kopp (1933). 8 Schipperges (1961). 9 Graham (1967). 10 Beek (1969), 2nd ed., see Beek (1974). Vesa Hirvonen, Toivo J. Holopainen & Miira Tuominen (eds.), Mind and Modality: Studies in the History of Philosophy in Honour of Simo Knuuttila. Leiden: Brill, 2006. 172 vesa hirvonen Basil Clarke’s Mental Disorder in Earlier Britain: Exploratory Studies (1975),11 Judith S. Neaman’s Suggestion of the Devil. The Origins of Madness (1975),12 Muriel Laharie’s La folie au Moyen Age XIe–XIIIe siècles (1991),13 and Jean Marie Fritz’s La folie au Moyen Age XIe–XIIIe siècles (1992).14 There are also studies of particular theological questions linked with madness, such as investigations into demonic possession15 and sacred folly.16 Various theological and philosophical questions have also been dealt with in studies of medieval juridical madness-theories,17 and in the studies of medieval medical theories of madness.18 Almost all of the studies dealing with medieval discussions on mental disorders concentrate on the Early or High Middle Ages. This is particularly true in the case of philosophical and theological discussions. A reason for this is that the most of the late medieval philosophers and theologians do not seem to have written systematically on mental disorders. Many of them, however, remarked on them in various contexts. Despite the lack of scholarly work concerning late medieval madness-conceptions, there have been rather pointed interpretations of them. Sometimes even those who have defended the rational character of the early or high medieval approaches to madness have claimed that, after Thomas Aquinas, the rational attitude changed. Thomas F. Graham wrote in his book Medieval minds. Mental health in the Middle Ages (1967) that philosophers after Thomas, such as Scotus and his followers, had “resistence to progress in learning,” and they “failed to grasp the objective spirit of Aristotle and Aquinas”: John Duns Scotus opposed the views of Aquinas and emphatically linked mental disorders with Satan. The uncompromising Scotus and his hair-splitting Dunsers 11 Clarke (1975). 12 Neaman (1975). 13 Laharie (1991). 14 Fritz (1992). 15 Kemp & Williams (1987); Kemp (1989), (1990) 135–146. 16 Saward (1980), esp. 31–103;Kinsman(1974), esp. 277–278. There are remarks concerning theological folly also in Swain (1932). For Nicholas of Cusa’s conception of folly, see Rice (1957); Billington (1984) 23–24. 17 For madness in Canon Law and in the revived Roman Law, see Pickett (1952); Kuttner (1935) 85–110;Neaman(1975) 70–106;Dols(1992) 431–433;Midelfort(1999) 188–191.Formadness in English Law, see Neaman (1975) 106–110;Kemp(1990) 125–128. 18 For articles dealing with medieval medical approaches to madness, see Jackson (1972); Kroll (1973); Mora (1978), (1980); Neugebauer (1979); Kroll & Bachrach (1982), (1984), (1986); Jacquart (1983); Pablo (1994). See also Kemp (1990) 114–125. The Peter of Spain -study and the Aquinas-studies mentioned above also belong partly to this group. For overall monographs, see Graham (1967); Beek (1969); Clarke (1975); Neaman (1975); Laharie (1991); Fritz (1992). For other relevant studies, see Schipperges (1990) 111–130..