The Development of Kraepelin’s Mature Diagnostic Concept of Catatonic Dementia Praecox: A Close Reading of Relevant Texts

Through a close reading of texts, this essay traces the development of catatonia from its origination in Kahlbaum’s 1874 monograph to Kraepelin’s catatonic subtype of his new category of Dementia Praecox (DP) in 1899. In addition to Kraepelin’s second to sixth textbook editions, I examine the six articles referenced by Kraepelin: Kahlbaum 1874, Brosius 1877, Neisser 1887, Behr 1891, Schüle 1897, and Aschaffenburg 1897 (Behr and Aschaffenburg worked under Kraepelin). While Brosius and Neisser confirmed Kahlbaum’s descriptions, Behr, Schüle, and Aschaffenburg concluded that his catatonic syndrome was nonspecific and only more narrowly defined forms, especially those with deteriorating course, might be diagnostically valid. Catatonia is first described by Kraepelin as a subform of Verrücktheit (chronic nonaffective delusional insanity) in his second to fourth editions. In his third edition, he adds a catatonic form of Wahnsinn (acute delusional-affective insanity). His fourth and fifth editions contain, respectively, catatonic forms of his two proto-DP concepts: Psychischen Entartungsprocesse and Die Verblödungsprocesse. Kahlbaum’s catatonia required a sequential phasic course. Positive psychotic symptoms were rarely noted, and outcome was frequently good. While agreeing on the importance of key catatonic signs (stupor, muteness, posturing, verbigeration, and excitement), Kraepelin narrowed Kahlbaum’s concept, dropping the phasic course, emphasizing positive psychotic symptoms and poor outcome. In his fourth to sixth editions, as he tried to integrate his three DP subtypes, he stressed, as suggested by Aschaffenburg and Schüle, the close clinical relationship between catatonia and hebephrenia and emphasized the bizarre and passivity delusions seen in catatonia, typical of paranoid DP.