Mr. Podmore"s attempt at a normal explanation by fraud, therefore, is of no weight. He has to exaggerate the value, as disproof, of such discrepancies as occur in all human evidence on all subjects. He has to lay stress on the interval of five weeks between the events and the collection of testimony by himself. But contemporary accounts appeared in the local newspapers, and he does not compare the contemporary with the later evidence, as we have done. There is one discrepancy which looks as if a witness, not here cited, came to think he had seen what he heard talked about. Finally, after abandoning the idea that mechanical means can possibly have produced the effect, Mr. Podmore falls back on the cunning of a half-witted girl whom nothing shows to have been half-witted. The alternative is that the girl was "the instrument of mysterious agencies."
So much for the hypothesis of a fraud, which has been identical in results from China to Peru and from Greenland to the Cape.
We now turn to the other, and concomitantly active cause, in Mr. Podmore"s theory, hallucination. "Many of the witnesses described the articles as moving slowly through the air, or exhibiting some peculiarity of flight."
(See e.g. the Worksop case.) Mr. Podmore adds another English case, presently to be noted, and a German one. "In default of any experimental evidence" (how about Mr. William Crookes"s?) "that disturbances of this kind are ever due to abnormal agency, I am disposed to explain the appearance of moving slowly or flying as a sensory illusion, conditioned by the excited state of the percipient." ("Studies," 157, 158.)
Before criticising this explanation, let us give the English affair, alluded to by Mr. Podmore.
The most curious modern case known to me is not of recent date, but it occurred in full daylight, in the presence of many witnesses, and the phenomena continued for weeks. The events were of 1849, and the record is expanded, by Mr. Bristow, a spectator, from an account written by him in 1854. The scene was Swanland, near Hull, in a carpenter"s shop, where Mr.
Bristow was employed with two fellow workmen. To be brief, they were pelted by odds and ends of wood, about the size of a common matchbox. Each blamed the others, till this explanation became untenable. The workrooms and s.p.a.ce above were searched to no purpose. The bits of wood sometimes danced along the floor, more commonly sailed gently along, or "moved as if borne on gently heaving waves." This sort of thing was repeated during six weeks. One piece of wood "came from a distant corner of the room towards me, describing what may be likened to a geometrical square, or corkscrew of about eighteen inches diameter.... Never was a piece seen to come in at the doorway." Mr. Bristow deems this period "the most remarkable episode in my life." (June 27, 1891.) The phenomena "did not depend on the presence of any one person or number of persons."
Going to Swanland, in 1891, Mr. Sidgwick found one surviving witness of these occurrences, who averred that the objects could not have been thrown because of the eccentricities of their course, which he described in the same way as Mr. Bristow. The thrower must certainly have had a native genius for "pitching" at base-ball. This witness, named Andrews, was mentioned by Mr. Bristow in his report, but not referred to by him for confirmation. Those to whom he referred were found to be dead, or had emigrated. The villagers had a superst.i.tious theory about the phenomena being provoked by a dead man, whose affairs had not been settled to his liking. So Mr. Darwin"s spoon danced--on a grave.[5]
This case has a certain interest _a propos_ of Mr. Podmore"s surmise that all such phenomena arise in trickery, which produces excitement in the spectators, while excitement begets hallucination, and hallucination takes the form of seeing the thrown objects move in a non-natural way.
Thus, I keep throwing things about. You, not detecting this stratagem, get excited, consequently hallucinated, and you believe you see the things move in spirals, or undulate as if on waves, or hop, or float, or glide in an impossible way. So close is the uniformity of hallucination that these phenomena are described, in similar terms, by witnesses (hallucinated, of course) in times old and new, as in cases cited by Glanvil, Increase Mather, Telfer (of Rerrick), and, generally, in works of the seventeenth century. Nor is this uniform hallucination confined to England. Mr. Podmore quotes a German example, and I received a similar testimony (to the flight of an object round a corner) from a gentleman who employed Esther Teed, "the Amherst Mystery," in his service. _He_ was not excited, for he was normally engaged in his normal stable, when the incident occurred unexpectedly as he was looking after his live stock. One may add the case of Cideville (1851) and Sir W. Crookes"s evidence, and that of Mr. Schhapoff.
Mr. Podmore must, therefore, suppose that, in states of excitement, the same peculiar form of hallucination develops itself uniformly in America, France, Germany, and England (not to speak of Russia), and persists through different ages. This is a novel and valuable psychological law.
Moreover, Mr. Podmore must hold that "excitement" lasted for six weeks among the carpenters in the shop at Swanland, one of whom writes like a man of much intelligence, and has thriven to be a master in his craft.
It is difficult to believe that he was excited for six weeks, and we still marvel that excitement produces the same uniformity of hallucination, affecting policemen, carpenters, marquises, and a F.R.S. We allude to Sir W. Crookes"s case.
Strictly scientific examination of these prodigies has been very rare. The best examples are the experiments of Sir William Crookes, F.R.S., with Home.[6] He demonstrated, by means of a machine constructed for the purpose, and automatically registering, that, in Home"s presence, a balance was affected to the extent of two pounds when Home was not in contact with the table on which the machine was placed. He also saw objects float in air, with a motion like that of a piece of wood on small waves of the sea (clearly excitement producing hallucination), while Home was at a distance, other spectators holding his hands, and his feet being visibly enclosed in a kind of cage. All present held each other"s hands, and all witnessed the phenomena. Sir W. Crookes being, professionally, celebrated for the accuracy of his observations, these circ.u.mstances are difficult to explain, and these are but a few cases among mult.i.tudes.
I venture to conceive that, on reflection, Mr. Podmore will doubt whether he has discovered an universal law of excited malperception, or whether the remarkable, and certainly undesigned, coincidence of testimony to the singular flight of objects does not rather point to an "abnormal agency"
uniform in its effects. Contagious hallucination cannot affect witnesses ignorant of each other"s existence in many lands and ages, nor could they cook their reports to suit reports of which they never heard.
We now turn to peculiarities in the so-called Medium, such as floating in air, change of bulk, and escape from lesion when handling or treading in fire. Mr. Tylor says nothing of Sir William Crookes"s cases (1871), but speaks of the alleged levitation, or floating in air, of savages and civilised men. These are recorded in Buddhist and Neoplatonic writings, and among Red Indians, in Tonquin (where a Jesuit saw and described the phenomena, 1730), in the "Acta Sanctorum," and among modern spiritualists.
In 1760, Lord Elcho, being at Home, was present at the _proces_ for canonising a Saint (unnamed), and heard witnesses swear to having seen the holy man levitated. Sir W. Crookes attests having seen Home float in air on several occasions. In 1871, the Master of Lindsay, now Lord Crawford and Balcarres, F.R.S., gave the following evidence, which was corroborated by the two other spectators, Lord Adare and Captain Wynne.
"I was sitting with Mr. Home and Lord Adare and a cousin of his. During the sitting, Mr. Home went into a trance, and in that state was carried out of the window in the room next to where we were, and was brought in at our window. The distance between the windows was about seven feet six inches, and there was not the slightest foothold between them, nor was there more than a twelve-inch projection to each window, which served as a ledge to put flowers on. _We heard the window in the next room lifted up_, and almost immediately after we saw Home floating in the air outside our window. The moon was shining full into the room; my back was to the light, and I saw the shadow on the wall of the window sill, and Home"s feet about six inches above it. He remained in this position for a few seconds, then raised the window and glided into the room feet foremost and sat down.
"Lord Adare then went into the next room to look at the window from which he had been carried. It was raised about eighteen inches, and he expressed his wonder how Mr. Home had been taken through so narrow an aperture. Home said, still entranced, "I will show you," and then with his back to the window he leaned back and was shot out of the aperture, head first, with the body rigid, and then returned quite quietly. The window is about seventy feet from the ground." The hypothesis of a mechanical arrangement of ropes or supports outside has been suggested, but does not cover the facts as described.
Mr. Podmore, who quotes this, offers the explanation that the witnesses were excited, and that Home "thrust his head and shoulders out of the window." But, if he did, they could not see him do it, for he was in the next room. A brick wall was between them and him. Their first view of Home was "floating in the air outside our window." It is not very easy to hold that a belief to which the collective evidence is so large and universal, as the belief in levitation, was caused by a series of saints, sorcerers, and others thrusting their heads and, shoulders, out of windows where the observers could not see them. Nor in Lord Crawford"s case is it easy to suppose that three educated men, if hallucinated, would all be hallucinated in the same way.
The argument of excited expectation and consequent hallucination does not apply to Mr. Hamilton Ade and M. Alphonse Karr, neither of whom was a man of science. Both were extremely prejudiced against Home, and at Nice went to see, and, if possible, to expose him. Home was a guest at a large villa in Nice, M. Karr and Mr. Ade were two of a party in a s.p.a.cious brilliantly lighted salon, where Home received them. A large heavy table, remote from their group, moved towards them. M. Karr then got under a table which rose in air, and carefully examined the s.p.a.ce beneath, while Mr. Ade observed it from above. Neither of them could discover any explanation of the phenomenon, and they walked away together, disgusted, disappointed, and reviling Home.[7]
In this case there was neither excitement nor desire to believe, but a strong wish to disbelieve and to expose Home. If two such witnesses could be hallucinated, we must greatly extend our notion of the limits of the capacity for entertaining hallucinations.
One singular phenomenon was reported in Home"s case, which has, however, little to do with any conceivable theory of spirits. He was said to become elongated in trance.[8] Mr. Podmore explains that "perhaps he really stretched himself to his full height"--one of the easiest ways conceivable of working a miracle, Iamblichus reports the same phenomenon in his possessed men.[9] Iamblichus adds that they were sometimes broadened as well as lengthened. Now, M. Fere observes that "any part of the body of an hysterical patient may change in volume, simply owing to the fact that the patient"s attention is fixed on that part."[10] Conceivably the elongation of Home and the ancient Egyptian mediums may have been an extreme case of this "change of volume." Could this be proved by examples, Home"s elongation would cease to be a "miracle." But it would follow that in this case observers were _not_ hallucinated, and the presumption would be raised that they were not hallucinated in the other cases. Indeed, this argument is of universal application.
There is another cla.s.s of "physical phenomena," which has no direct bearing on our subject. Many persons, in many ages, are said to have handled or walked through fire, not only without suffering pain, but without lesion of the skin. Iamblichus mentions this as among the peculiarities of his "possessed" men; and in "Modern Mythology" (1897) I have collected first-hand evidence for the feat in cla.s.sical times, and in India, Fiji, Bulgaria, Trinidad, the Straits Settlements, and many other places. The evidence is that of travellers, officials, missionaries, and others, and is backed (for what photographic testimony is worth) by photographs of the performance. To hold glowing coals in his hand, and to communicate the power of doing so to others, was in Home"s _repertoire_.
Lord Crawford saw it done on eight occasions, and himself received from Home"s hand the glowing coal unharmed. A friend of my own, however, still bears the blister of the hurt received in the process. Sir W. Crookes"s evidence follows:
"At Mr. Home"s request, whilst he was entranced, I went with him to the fireplace in the back drawing-room. He said, "We want you to notice particularly what Dan is doing." Accordingly I stood close to the fire, and stooped down to it when he put his hands in....
"Mr. Home then waved the handkerchief about in the air two or three times, held it above his head, and then folded it up and laid it on his hand like a cushion. Putting his other hand into the fire, he took out a large lump of cinder, red-hot at the lower part, and placed the red part on the handkerchief. Under ordinary circ.u.mstances it would have been in a blaze.
In about half a minute he took it off the handkerchief with his hand, saying, "As the power is not strong, if we leave the coal longer it will burn." He then put it on his hand, and brought it to the table in the front room, where all but myself had remained seated."
Mr. Podmore explains that only two candles and the fire gave light on one occasion, and that "possibly" Home"s hands were protected by some "non-conducting substance." He does not explain how this substance was put on Lord Crawford"s hands, nor tell us what this valuable substance may be.
None is known to science, though it seems to be known to Fijians, Tongans, Klings, and Bulgarians, who walk through fire unhurt.
It is not necessary to believe Sir W. Crookes"s a.s.sertions that he saw Home perform the fire-tricks, for we can fall back on the lack of light (only two candles and the fire-light), as also on the law of hallucination caused by excitement. But it _is_ necessary to believe this distinguished authority"s statement about his ignorance of "some non-conducting substance:"
"Schoolboys" books and mediaeval tales describe how this can be done with alum and other ingredients. It is possible that the skin may be so hardened and thickened by such preparations that superficial charring might take place without the pain becoming great; but the surface of the skin would certainly suffer severely. After Home had recovered from the trance, I examined his hand with care to see if there were any signs of burning or of previous preparation. I could detect no trace or injury to the skin, which was soft and delicate, like a woman"s. Neither were there signs of any preparation having been previously applied. I have often seen conjurers and others handle red-hot coals and iron, but there were always palpable signs of burning."[11]
In September 1897 a crew of pa.s.sengers went from New Zealand to see the Fijian rites, which, as reported in the "Fiji Times," corresponded exactly with the description published by Mr. Basil Thomson, himself a witness.
The interesting point, historically, is the combination in Home of all the _repertoire_ of the possessed men in Iamblichus. We certainly cannot get rid of the fire-trick by aid of a hypothetical "non-conducting substance."
Till the "substance" is tested experimentally it is not a _vera causa_. We might as well say "spirits" at once. Both that "substance" and those "spirits" are equally "in the air." Yet Mr. Podmore"s "explanations" (not satisfactory to himself) are conceived so thoroughly in the spirit of popular science--one of them casually discovering a new psychological law, a second contradicting the facts it seeks to account for, a third generously inventing an unknown substance--that they ought to be welcomed by reviewers and lecturers.
It seems wiser to admit our ignorance and suspend our belief.
Here closes the futile chapter of explanations. Fraud is a _vera causa_, but an hypothesis difficult of application when it is admitted that the effects could not be caused by ordinary mechanical means. Hallucination, through excitement, is a _vera causa_, but its remarkable uniformity, as described by witnesses from different lands and ages, knowing nothing of each other, makes us hesitate to accept a sweeping hypothesis of hallucination. The case for it is not confirmed, when we have the same reports from witnesses certainly not excited.
This extraordinary bundle, then, of reports, practically identical, of facts paralysing to belief, this bundle made up of statements from so many ages and countries, can only be "filed for reference." But it is manifest that any savage who shared the experiences of Sir W. Crookes, Lord Crawford, Mr. Hamilton Ade, M. Robert de St. Victor at Cideville, and Policeman Higgs at Worksop, would believe that a spirit might tenant a stick or stone--so believing he would be a Fetishist. Thus even of Fetishism the probable origin is in a region of which we know nothing--the _X_ region.
[Footnote 1: A sketch of the history will be found in the author"s _c.o.c.k Lane and Common Sense_.]
[Footnote 2: The best source is his article on "Poltergeists."
_Proceedings_ xi. 45-116. See, too, his "Poltergeists" in _Studies in Psychical Research_.]
[Footnote 3: _Studies in Psychical Research_, p. 140.]
[Footnote 4: See Preface to this edition for correction.]
[Footnote 5: _Proceedings_, S.P.R. vii. 383-394.]
[Footnote 6: See Sir W. Crookes"s _Researches in Spiritualism_.]
[Footnote 7: Mr. Ade has given me this information. He recorded the circ.u.mstances in his Diary at the time.]
[Footnote 8: _Report of Dialectical Society_, p. 209.]
[Footnote 9: See Porphyry, in Parthey"s edition (Berlin, 1857), iii. 4.]
[Footnote 10: _Bulletin de la Societe de Biologie_, 1880, p. 399.]
[Footnote 11: Crookes, _Proceedings_, ix. 308.]
APPENDIX C
_CRYSTAL-GAZING_
Since the chapter on crystal-gazing was in type, a work by Dr. Pierre Janet has appeared, styled "Les Nevroses et les Idees Fixes."[1] It contains a chapter on crystal-gazing. The opinion of Dr. Janet, as that of a savant familiar, at the Salpetriere, with "neurotic" visionaries, cannot but be interesting. Unluckily, the essay must be regarded as seriously impaired in value by Dr. Janet"s singular treatment of his subject. Nothing is more necessary in these researches than accuracy of statement. Now, Dr. Janet has taken a set of experiences, or experiments, of Miss X."s from that lady"s interesting essay, already cited; has attributed them, not to Miss X., but to various people--for example, to _une jeune fille, une pauvre voyante, une personne un peu mystique_; has altered the facts in the spirit of romance; and has triumphantly given that explanation, revival of memory, which was a.s.signed by Miss X.
herself.
Throughout his paper Dr. Janet appears as the calm man of science p.r.o.nouncing judgment on the visionary vagaries of "haunted" young girls and disappointed seeresses. No such persons were concerned; no such hauntings, supposed premonitions, or "disillusions" occurred; the romantic and "marvellous" circ.u.mstances are mythopoeic accretions due to Dr.