Autism is a new phenomenon, clearly.
It is important to understand that increased diagnoses of anything is only indicative of an increased understanding or awareness of it, not necessarily greater prevalence.
Autism is a new phenomenon, clearly.
It is important to understand that increased diagnoses of anything is only indicative of an increased understanding or awareness of it, not necessarily greater prevalence.
A very brief overview:
The term “autism” was first coined by a Swiss psychiatrist, Bleuler, in 1908, albeit as a form of childhood schizophrenia (another definition he coined), although it wasn’t until 1948 that Kanner started to nail down the definition and diagnosis. In 1977 a study on twins said a great big ‘nope’ to the older understanding that autism was caused by emotionally neglectful mothers and put forward strong evidence that it is basically hereditary (a child of autistic parents is more likely to be autistic).
Three years later the DSM-III (basically the bible for psychiatry) separated autism from schizophrenia and granted it its own definition, which was then developed in subsequent years, leading to an understanding of it as a spectrum in the early 1990s. In 1998 a fraudulent study was published, linking autism to the MMR vaccine. Issues with this study ranged from conflict of interest (not least the lead author holding a patent for an alternative measles vaccine) to data manipulation and falsification (straight up lies). After an extensive exploration into the paper, it was retracted in 2010, and the lead author was struck off the medical register three months later.
As mentioned at the start, autism did not suddenly appear in 1908 when it was first defined, just as it did not appear with the MMR vaccine. Below are a handful of examples of what I, as someone with a somewhat spicy noggin, believe represent awesome (pre)historical people (Linnaeus is totally a hero of mine) who are recorded as demonstrating ways of being in the world that I strongly relate to the autistic experience. Please do, however, be aware that by very definition these people were never diagnosed, and of course I have no way of discussing their inner mental worlds with them (plus I am an archaeologist, not a neuroscientist nor psychiatrist).
Carl Linnaeus (1707 – 1778)
Understanding the world through categories, and taking pleasure in allocating said categories
Many of you will have come across the naming convention whereby a living organism has its common name (house sparrow, for example), and two Latin words which form its ‘official’ name (Passer domesticus). This is true of all creatures, with new ones being added fairly regularly. There is not always agreement within academia as to what these two Latin words should be, but they are always there. The former is the genus name, and the latter is the species. If you come across one with three words, it is the genus, species, and subspecies (now you know)!
Now you’d think that this was something that evolved (pun totally intended) over time. No! Admittedly, as mentioned, it has been added to and tweaked, however the naming system was invented, and an incredible number of critters thus named, by one chap. Carl Linnaeus. In the 1700s, this fellow sat down and looked at the physical characteristics of pretty much every creature that was known to Western science at the time, and categorised them into Kingdom, Phylum, Class, Order, Family, Genus, and Species.
Every. Single. One.
But of course, autism did not exist until vaccines were invented (first one in 1796) [sarcasm].
Immanuel Kant (1724 – 1804)
Morals, hierarchy, and an intense sense of ‘right’ and ‘wrong’
Also a big fan of categories, Kant lived such an ordered life that his neighbours were said to be able to set their clocks by the timing of his daily walks.
One of his most famous philosophical concepts is that of the ‘categorical imperative’ (nothing to do with categorising, though). Terribly simplified (I am not a philosopher as much as I am not a psychiatrist), this basically posits that there is an absolute moral right, which cannot be opted out of by rational beings (aka people), and that to break this moral obligation is to effectively opt out of humanity and rationality. Kant expanded on this in later works, including using it to form the basis of aspects of his political works, whereby society works when all parties, plebs to emperors, act morally/rationally (with these being almost indistinguishable to Kant), but that should this commitment to morality/rationality be broken, then the subjects are not obligated to continue to adhere to the societal hierarchy.
But of course, autism did not exist until vaccines were invented (first one in 1796) [still sarcasm].
Neurodiversity in prehistory
I am an archaeologist, remember?
Looking at the examples above, you’d be forgiven for thinking that I am arguing that ASD came about in the enlightenment, but I assure you that it is just due to my rather unfashionable appreciation for 18th century thinkers.
It is well established that ASD has a strong genetic factor (often leading to a lack of diagnosis as (autistic) parents are asked how “normal” their kid is). So, if it is so terrible (caveat: if someone offered me a ‘cure’ I would not hesitate to throw it out of the window), then why does it still exist? Natural selection is a thing! And whilst the genetic indicators are perhaps not quite so definitive, the same could be pondered of ADHD.
Thankfully we don’t have to wonder too much, as there has been some really excellent research seeking to illuminate exactly this. ADHD and ASD as adaptive (as opposed to maladaptive) in prehistory effectively boil down to two broad concepts. The first is simply that, especially in small communities, having individuals with some diversity of neurology and ways of being would increase the success and survivability of the group as a whole, as a group who all think/act in one way are vulnerable to an environment that changes to no longer suit that way of being (see every extinction event ever). The second concept is that specific ASD and ADHD traits were adaptive, beyond simply for their difference to the ‘norm’. Attention to detail? More likely to spot that tiny change in the colour of a bush which tells you there’s a predator in there! Pattern recognition? A heightened ability to predict behaviours of prey animals, such as migration routes! High energy? In a species (us) that evolved to run, that can only be a good thing! There has even been some research that suggests that some of the technical and cultural advances of prehistory, such as art and complex tool making, came about due to neurodiverse minds.
But admittedly these are all conjecture. They demonstrate reasons why neurodiversity might not have been selected away from, but don’t demonstrate that this is actually what happened.
Do not worry! Science (archaeology) to the rescue!
Two of the genetic markers that are associated with autism have been traced back to around 500,000 years ago. For context for those of you who aren’t familiar with the ‘what’ and ‘when’ of palaeoanthropology, this is when the split between neanderthals and Homo erectus/ergaster occurred (populations of the latter becoming H. sapiens, i.e. modern humans a couple of hundred thousand years later).
To hammer this home a touch, this basically suggests that autism predates our entire species.
But of course, autism did not exist until vaccines were invented (first one in 1796) [yup, sarcasm again].
Further reading:
A great (and free) e-book on autism in the palaeolithic: (PDF) The Stone Age Origins of Autism
Including some more modern history, and generally a decent resource: National Autistic Society