English law formally divided people by mental capacity and property management.
The law learned to ask whether someone could manage property before it learned to ask what support they needed.
Medieval English law used categories such as idiot and lunatic. These were legal terms, not just insults at the time.
The distinction mattered because the law treated people differently depending on whether their condition was seen as lifelong or changeable. Property, guardianship and control were central concerns.
This legal history matters because capacity remains a major concept today. Modern law is far more developed and rights based, but the roots are old.
The long history of capacity law shows how disabled and mentally distressed people were often understood through control of affairs, property and risk, rather than support, communication and autonomy.
Capacity should never become a shortcut for dismissing humanity.
The real question should not be only can this person manage unaided. It should also be what support would make their voice, choices and rights real.