Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 246 views

    Zoar or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival by W H Salter

    Uploaded by

    morefaya2006
    This document provides an introduction and overview of the book "Zoar, or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival" by W. H. Salter. It discusses how many bereaved people seek answers on survival after death from psychical research. It notes the book aims to examine the extensive evidence accumulated since Myers' influential work, which left the problem incomplete. The introduction outlines Salter's experience and background in the Society for Psychical Research to provide context for his examination of the evidence and conclusions on survival in the book.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Zoar or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival by W H Salter

    Uploaded by

    morefaya2006
    246 views110 pages
    This document provides an introduction and overview of the book "Zoar, or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival" by W. H. Salter. It discusses how many bereaved people seek answers on survival after death from psychical research. It notes the book aims to examine the extensive evidence accumulated since Myers' influential work, which left the problem incomplete. The introduction outlines Salter's experience and background in the Society for Psychical Research to provide context for his examination of the evidence and conclusions on survival in the book.

    Original Title

    Zoar or the Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival by W H Salter

    Copyright

    © Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)

    Available Formats

    PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    This document provides an introduction and overview of the book "Zoar, or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival" by W. H. Salter. It discusses how many bereaved people seek answers on survival after death from psychical research. It notes the book aims to examine the extensive evidence accumulated since Myers' influential work, which left the problem incomplete. The introduction outlines Salter's experience and background in the Society for Psychical Research to provide context for his examination of the evidence and conclusions on survival in the book.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    246 views110 pages

    Zoar or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival by W H Salter

    Uploaded by

    morefaya2006
    This document provides an introduction and overview of the book "Zoar, or The Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival" by W. H. Salter. It discusses how many bereaved people seek answers on survival after death from psychical research. It notes the book aims to examine the extensive evidence accumulated since Myers' influential work, which left the problem incomplete. The introduction outlines Salter's experience and background in the Society for Psychical Research to provide context for his examination of the evidence and conclusions on survival in the book.

    Copyright:

    Attribution Non-Commercial (BY-NC)
    Download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as pdf or txt
    of 110
    At a glance
    Powered by AI
    The passage discusses the challenges of psychical research and the need for an open mind when studying this topic.

    The book discusses evidence from psychical research concerning survival after death.

    Some of the topics covered in the book include apparitions, hauntings, materializations, mediumship, and crosscorrespondences.

    W. H.

    Salter

    ZOAR
    or the Evidence of Psychical Research Concerning Survival

    Zoar,ortheEvidenceofPsychicalResearchConcerning Survival
    W.H.Salter
    Publisher: Sidgwick and Jack son, London Published: 1961 Pages: 238 A vailability: O ut of Print

    Chapter1:Introduction Chapter2:TheScopeofPsychicalResearchandtheNatureoftheEvidence Chapter3:Apparitions Chapter4:Apparitions:SomeSpecialTypes Chapter5:HauntsandPoltergeists Chapter6:Materialisations Chapter7:EcstasyandInspiration Chapter8:Dissociation Chapter9:TheControlsofMediums Chapter10:CommunicationsthroughMediums.I:AsaffectedbyNormalCauses Chapter11:CommunicationsthroughMediums.II:AsaffectedbyParanormalFacultiesoftheLiving Chapter12:CommunicationsthroughMediums.III:LimitedScopeoftheseCausesandFaculties Chapter13:Crosscorrespondences Chapter14:Crosscorrespondences:NewEvidence Chapter15:ToWhatdoestheEvidencePoint? Chapter16:Zoar:"IsitnotaLittleOne?"

    William Henry Salter 1880-1969. W e nt to Trinity C olle ge , C am bridge , with a C lassical Scholarship in 1899, took a first class de gre e in 1901, turne d to re ad Law, and was calle d to the Barin 1905. Joine d the Socie ty for Psychical R e se arch in 1916, to be com e a m e m be r of its C ouncil thre e ye ars late r. From 1920 to 1931, a ve ry difficult financial pe riod, he se rve d as Honorary Tre asure r; and from 1924 to 1948 he was Honorary Se cre tary. He was Pre side nt from 1947 to 1948. He m ade m any contributions to the SPR Journal and Proceedings , and publishe d two adm irable book s, Ghosts and Apparitions (1938) and Zoar (1961). Zoar, or The Evidence for Psychical Research Concerning Survival (1961, Sidgwick and Jack son, London).

    Chapter1:Introduction
    W.H.Salter DURINGTHEmanyyearsthatIwasanHonoraryOfficeroftheSocietyforPsychicalResearch(SPR)I wasoftenconsultedbypersonswho,underthestressofrecentbereavement,wishedforenlightenmentonthe questionwhethermansurvivesthedeathofthebody.Manyofthoseseekingadvicehad,beforetheywere bereaved,nosettledconvictions:theirvaguerecollectionsofearlyreligiousteachingaboutthefuturelife,itself perhapslackingprecision,contendedintheirmindswithequallyvaguenationsthatsciencehaddisprovedall that.Otherswhohadreachedwhattheysupposedtobeasecurepositionofbelieforunbelief,foundthatitdid notholdfastagainsttheshockofbereavement. Notallbereavedpersonsofcoursefindthemselvesineitherofthesepredicaments,butevidentlymanydo.They cometotheSocietyexpectingthatitcannotonlygiveaplainyesornotoaproblemthathasexercisedthe mindofmanfromtheearliestages,butcanputshortlyandcrisplythereasonsandevidencefororagainst belief. Theyhavenoclearideaofthesortofevidencewhichpsychicalresearchhasbroughttobearontheproblem,its varietyandcomplexity,thedifferentdegreesofcertaintyattachingtodifferentpartsofit,thealternative interpretationstowhichmuchofitissusceptible.Asbereavementcomes,soonerorlater,tomostpeople,and noonecansayinadvancehowmuchhewillbeshakenbyit,itissurelyprudentforeveryonetopreparehimself insomedegreefortheshock,byconsideringtheproblemfromallitsrelevantaspectsreligion,philosophy, physiologyandpsychologyinallitsbranches,andespeciallythatbranchofpsychologyknownaspsychical research,withwhichthisbookdeals. Myers'sHumanPersonalityanditsSurvivalofBodilyDeath,leftuncompletedbyhimwhenhediedin1901,isa splendidbook,buttheevidencebearingontheproblemofsurvivalthathasaccumulatedsincehisdeathis immense,andmuchofitofakindunknownatthattime.Ofmorerecentdateareseveralbriefsummadesofthe evidencewithinstructivecomment,notablythelatterpartofTyrrell'sScienceandPsychicPhenomena(1938), GardnerMurphy'spapersintheJournaloftheAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearch(1945,1946,since reprintedinbookform)andProfessorBroad'sMyersMemorialLecture(SPR1958).Fulleraccountsaretobe foundinMrs.Heywood'sTheSixthSense(1959)andProfessorHornellHart'sTheEnigmaofSurvival,which coversomuchofthegroundastoleavemeindoubtwhetherIshouldbejustifiedinputtingmyownviewsbefore thepublic.Itseemstome,however,thattheimportanceofthesubjectissuchthatanyonewhoseexperience hasgivenhimbothafairlywideknowledgeofpsychicalresearchasawhole,andadetailedknowledgeofsides ofitstillunfamiliartothepublic,oughttoputforwardhisviews,andputthemforwardcandidly,regardlessof whethertheyareinlinewithopinionsgenerallyheld,orwithsuchasareheldbymoreeminentpersons,or whethertheyrestonitemsofevidenceorprocessesofreasoningthatwillstrikemanyreadersasodd. Ishouldperhapssayattheoutset,whatthereaderwouldsoondiscoverforhimself,thatIhavenothingmore thanthemostsuperficialknowledgeofanyoftheprovincesoflearningonwhichpsychicalresearchabutsthe otherbranchesofpsychology,philosophy,orscienceingeneral.ItrustthatItrespassontheseprovincesonly whennecessary,andthenwithadiffidencenotinferiortothatshownbytheirrightfuloccupantswhenthey discusspsychicalresearchwithoutmakingaclosestudyofit.TheSPRhasmadeitasettledpolicytoexpress nocorporateopinion,leavingthefieldopenforunfettereddiscussion.Itisthereforenotinanywayresponsible fortheopinionsexpressedinthisbookbyoneofitsformerofficers.ButItakethisopportunityofthankingthe Councilforpermissiontoquoteextensivelyfromitspublications. Anydiscussionofsurvivalnaturallyraisesquestionsastothebiasofthepartiestoit.Theemotionaltingethat

    usuallyaffectsprofessedlyintellectualargumentsastothedestinyofhumanpersonalityafterdeathsuggests thatverydeeplevelshavebeenstirred,thattheprimitiveanimalinstinctforselfpreservationhasperhaps sublimateditselfintoadesiretoperpetuateindividuallifebeyondbodilydeath.Butthebiasisnotalways,of course,infavourofbeliefinsurvival.AnemotionalhorrorofthewholeideaoflifeafterdeathinspiredLucretiusto writeoneoftheworld'sgreatestpoems.Manysensitivepersonshavebeenledpartlybythecaresofbodily existence,andpartlybydistastefortheirownpersonalitiestohopethatthegospelpreachedbyLucretiusmay betrue.Thenagainthereisthe"ConflictofScienceandReligion",notindeednowadayswagedwiththesame acrimonyasacenturyago,buthavingnonethelessaninfluenceonthebeliefsoftheordinarycitizen,whohas probablyneverbotheredtoexaminetheissuescritically.Whocanbesurehowfarandinwhatwayhisjudgment astosurvivalhasbeenconditionedbythesevariedandcontraryinfluences? Inthismatternoonecanclaimcompleteimmunityfrombias,butahighdegreeofprotectionisgivenbyalong traininginpsychicalresearch.Tobeeffectivethetrainingshouldincludeawidegeneralknowledgeofallthe phenomena,ofthepasthistoryofthesubject,andofthebackgroundofpopularbeliefandsentiment.Tothis shouldbeaddedamuchmoredetailedknowledgeofatleastoneofthemainbranches,"mental"or"physical", spontaneous,mediumisticorexperimental,combinedwithagooddealoffirsthandexperienceasexperimenter, sitterorautomatist.AnofficeroftheSPR,anddoubtlessofsomeothersocietiestoo,acquiresmuchofthisin hisdaytodaywork.Heisconstantlyinterviewingenquirerswhoreportoccurrencesthathavepuzzledthemand thattheyareinclinedtoregardasuncanny.Hegetslettersfromallovertheworldgivingsimilarreports.Long manuscriptspurportingtohavebeendictatedbyspiritsaresubmittedforhisopinion.Fromtimetotimehevisits a"haunted"house,orsitswithamedium,ortakespartinanexperimentforextrasensoryperception.Whatever hereads,hearsorobserveshecandiscusswithexperiencedcolleaguesofanindependentturnofmind,and,if heiswise,hewilldosowheneverhecomesacrossanythingseemingtorequireseriousconsideration. Indealingaspartoftheroutineofhisofficewiththisbewilderingandheterogeneousmassofmaterialthe researcherhastokeephisattentioncloselyfixedonthedetails.Itisonlybydoingthisthathecanhopeto understandWhatsortofhappeningshisfellowcitizensregardas"supernormal"andwhy,ortograspthestrong andweakpointsinareportofanapparitionorapoltergeist,inasittingfor"physical"phenomena,orofan experimentinclairvoyance.Averyintimateknowledgeofdetailinanysubjectwillpreventthepossessorofit fromtoofreelygeneralisingonit.ThismaybeareasonwhymostofthesurveysofpsychicalresearchMyers's greatbookisanoutstandingexceptionhavebeenwrittenbypersonswhosemindswerenotpreoccupiedbythe daytodayworkoftheSPRorofanyotherbodywithsimilaraimsandmethods. IhavebeenamemberoftheSPRformorethanfortyyearsandanofficerformostofthattime,butengaged moreinadministrationthanresearch.Ishouldlik etothinkthatIhadbeensufficientlyinvolvedinresearchto deriveafairdegreeofimmunityfrombiasinwritingonit,butnotsoinvolvedastoinhibitgeneralisation. Mywife'smembershipoftheSocietywasevenlongerandherfirsthandexperience,extendingtomostbranches ofthesubject,muchfuller.Neitherofushadfollowedcloselyrecentdevelopmentsinquantitativeexperiment. Shehadagreatdealmoreexperienceofsittingwith"physical"mediumsthanIhad,asafteratimeIfoundthe strainontheeyesduringasanceindimlightintolerable.Wemightbothclaimconsiderableknowledgeof "spontaneouscases"(i.e.,apparitions,etc.),trancemediumshipandautomaticwriting. Shewasamemberof"theSPRgroupofAutomatists",ofwhichhermother,Mrs.Verrall,wasthefirstmember inpointoftime.Theautomaticwritingsofthegrouparegenerallyagreedamongpsychicalresearcherstobeof greatimportance,entitlingthemtomorethansummarytreatment.Butmanyaspectsofthemhaveneverbeen madepublicbefore,oronlyscrappilyinanarticlehereandthere,andIamthereforediscussingthemwitha fullnessthatwouldotherwisebeoutofproportiontothescaleofthebook. Ifirstbegantowritethisbooksixorsevenyearsago,butcircumstancespreventedmythencompletingmore thanthefirsthalf.Aftersomeyears'intervalItookitupagainandfinishedit,nottomyentiresatisfaction,as someofthelaterpartsdidnotjoinonwelltotheearlierones.Whenthebookwasbegunandwhenthefirstdraft wasfinished,Ihadnotsufferedanyrecentbereavement.AbouteighteenmonthsagoIbegantryingtoremodelit bypullingittogether.IhadnotgonefarwhenIsufferedthecrushingblowofmywife'ssuddendeath.Icanno longerthereforeclaimtowritewithemotionaldetachmentbutwillmostpositivelyassertthattheopinionsInow putforwardaresubstantiallythesameasthosethatmywifeandIoftendiscussedtogether,andthatIformed whentheendofearthlylifeseemedfaroffforeitherofus. Thequestiononeoftenhearsput,"Isdeaththeend?"istoostupidtodeserveananswer.Afterthedeathof anyonethingsaredifferentfromwhattheywouldhavebeenifhehadneverlived,andthatistruewhetherthe deathbeofSocrates,Caesar,orShakespeare,ortheveriestSimpleSimon.Somethingcontinues,andthe

    questionthatneedsanansweris,whatisthatsomething?Inthisbook,afterachapterdefiningthenatureof psychicalresearch,itsscopeandmethods,therewillfollowchaptersconcernedwiththeevidencesometimes claimedtosupporttheopinion,ancientandwidespread,thatafterthedeathofthebodyoffleshandbloodmen andwomenliveoninabodyhavingsome,butnotall,ofthepropertiesweassociatewithordinarymatter.In thesechaptersapparitionsofvariouskinds,poltergeists,andthesocalled"physicalphenomena"ofthesance room.willbediscussed. Thesucceedingchapterswilldealwithevidence,derivedfrom"trancemediumship"andautomaticwriting,that doesnotraisethequestionofsurvivalinaquasimaterialform.Thissectionwillopenwithadiscussionof variouspsychologicalstateswhich,thoughnotinthemselvesmediumistic,throwlightonmediumistictrance andtheControlsthatemergeinit,andwillproceedtoconsiderhowfarcommunicationspurportingtocomefrom thespiritsofthedeadcanbeattributedtothefaculties,normalorparanormal,oftheliving.Anattemptwillthen bemadetoconstructatheorythatwillcoveralltheevidencesetoutinthepreviouschaptersthatis,inmyview, trustworthy.

    Chapter2:TheScopeofPsychicalResearchandtheNatureoftheEvidence
    W.H.Salter PSYCHICALRESEARCHistheattempttocompletetheexplorationofhumanpersonalitybythe systematicinvestigationofallitsrealorsupposedfacultiesthatappeartobepartofthenaturalorderofthings butnottohavebeeneffectivelybroughtwithintheprovinceofanyotherdepartmentofsciencethatdealswith humanactivities. Popularbeliefhasinmanytimesandplacesfirmlyheldthatsomepersons,atleast,hadthegiftof apprehendingevents,distantinspaceorfutureintime,andofgettingintotouchwithmodesofexistenceother thantheeverydaylifeofthebody.Theevidencetothiseffect,whichintheformofghoststoriesandreportsof premonitorydreamsandsimilarhappeningshadaccumulatedforageswithoutsystematicenquiry,receivedin thenineteenthcenturyalargeincreasefromsomeoftheeffectsobservedbytheearlystudentsofhypnotism andfromthereportsofphenomenaoccurringatSpiritualistsances.Thecaseforacareful,impartial examinationoftheevidencewasthusgrowingstrongeratthesametimethatthetheologicalobjectionstoit wereweakening.Thisledtothefoundationin1882oftheSocietyforPsychicalResearch(SPR)byagroup whichincludedmanyleadingscientists,philosophersandscholars. Solittlewasknownaboutthesethingsatthetime,thatthefoundersoftheSociety,inamanifestoissuedby theminthefirstvolumeoftheSociety'sProceedings ,didnotattemptamoreexactdefinitionofthesubject matteroftheirproposedresearchesthantodescribeitas"thatlargegroupofdebatablephenomenadesignated bysuchtermsasmesmeric,psychicalandSpiritualistic".Theenumerationinthesamedocumentofparticular kindsofphenomenaisnowmainlyofhistoricalinterest. Thesephenomenaandthefacultiesthroughwhichtheyseemedtobeproducedwereintheearlydaysofthe Societyknownas"supernormal",awordwhichwasunfortunatelyliabletoconfusionwith"supernatural", especiallyasmanyoftheoccurrenceswithwhichpsychicalresearchhad,andstillhas,todealareofkindsto whichlongestablishedtraditionhasattachedsupernaturalassociationsapparitions,forexample,and foreknowledge.Itcannotbetooclearlystatedthatpsychicalresearchneitheraffirmsnordeniestherealityof anybeings,orthings,oreventsbelongingtothesupernaturalorder.Whenhowever,asisoftenthecase,such eventsoccurinasettingwhichseemstobepartofthenaturalorderofthings,thatsettingcanproperlybe investigatedbyordinary,mundanemethods.Theethicalordevotionalsignificanceofanyeventtranscendingthe naturalordermaybeofthegreatestimportancetothepsychicalresearcherasaperson,butitliesaltogether outsidetheprovinceofhisstudies,justasastudentofbirdsmayhaveanintenseaestheticenjoymentoftheir colouring,althoughscientificallyheisonlyconcernedwithitasdistinguishingonespeciesfromanother,orfor itsprotectivevalueorotherbiologicalutility. "Paranormal"hasnowingeneralusetakentheplaceof"supernormal"andwillheusedwiththatmeaninginthis book.Itisitselfhowevernotfreefromobjection.What,itmaybeasked,ismeantbythe"normal"?Not,itis importanttosay,theusualorhabitual,althoughinothercontextsthewordisoftenlooselyusedwiththat meaning.Ithasbeenfoundnecessaryinpsychicalresearchtodrawadistinctionbetweenwhatisandwhatis not,atanygiventime,acceptedasrealbygeneralscientificopinion,andtofixonawordthatwillbrieflyindicate whateverissoaccepted.Forthispurpose"normal"isperhapsasgoodasanyother,butthereis,asIshalltry latertoshow,reasontobelievethatsomefacultieswhichhavenotasyetwonscientificrecognitionareas widelydistributedasanythathavewonit,thoughtheymayoftennotmanifestthemselvesinawaytoattract casualattention. Theprefixalsoneedsjustification.Oneoftheobjectionsto"supernormal"wasthatitsuggestedthatthethings sodescribedwereinsomewayssuperiororpreferabletothegeneralrunofthings.Whetherornotsucha suggestioncorrespondedwiththefacts,itwasundesirableeventohintatitinatermdescriptiveofthingsthe distinctivecharacterofwhichwasdeterminedinquiteanotherway.Theprefix"para"suggestssome resemblancebetweenthefacultiesandeventsthataretheproperstudyofpsychicalresearchandthosethatare moregenerallyrecognised,someparallelismbetweenthem.Ithas,forexample,beenclaimedthatby "clairvoyance"awrittenmessageenclosedinasealedandopaqueenvelopecanberead,andthatby "telekinesis"amediumcanraiseanobjectwithouttheuseofmuscular,mechanicalorotherphysicalforceof anykindknowntoscience.Iftheseclaimsaretoberegardedassubstantiatedandinmyview"clairvoyance"

    and"telekinesis"areamongthemoredubiousphenomenaofpsychicalresearchitisonlyintheeffect produced,thereadingofthemessageortheraisingoftheobject,thattheycanbeconsideredparallelto recognisedfacultiesandforces.Thereisnoresemblanceofmethod,andinthatliestheessentialdifference. Exceptionalefficiencyintheuseofrecognisedforcesdoesnotconstituteparanormality.Theliftingofafew ouncesatasanceheldunderstrictconditionswouldcountformoreinthatwaythanallthemuscularfeatsofa modernHercules. TheFounders'manifestoalreadymentionedcontainedthefollowingparagraph: "TheaimoftheSocietywillbetoapproachthesevariousproblems[]eeabove]withoutprejudiceor prepossessionofanykind,andinthesamespiritofexactandunimpassionedinquirywhichhas enabledSciencetosolvesomanyproblems,oncenotlessobscurenorlesshotlydebated.The foundersofthisSocietyfullyrecognisetheexceptionaldifficultieswhichsurroundthisbranchof research..." Itis,then,tothespiritofscientificenquiry,andnotnecessarilytothemethod,oranyofthemethods,followed bysciencethatpsychicalresearchiscommitted.Observationandexperimentarebothusedbyestablished branchesofscience,therelativeimportanceofthetwomethodsvaryinginthedifferentbranches.Observation, forexample,forreasonstooobvioustocallforelaboration,predominatesinastronomy,andexperimentin chemistry.Bothmethodsalsohavetheiruseinpsychology,and,therealso,withdegreesofimportancethat varyaccordingtotheparticulardepartmentofthatscience. Therearemanyfactorsthatrestricttheefficiencyofexperimentwithhumanbeings.Reasonsofhumanity,in civilisedcountries,forbidsomekindsofexperiment,andinotherkindstheexperimentermaybefrustratedby deliberateresistanceordeceptiononthepartofhissubject.Notwithstandingtheseandotherdifficulties,much hasbeenlearntpartlybyexperimentandpartlybyobservationaboutsuchmentalactivitiesasarecommonto mankindortolargehumangroupsnational,cultural,religious,economicandthestrengthandprevalenceof thefactorsinvolvedcanbestatisticallyassessed. Therearehoweverotherfactorsofmind,temperamentanddispositionthatvarysofromoneindividualtoanother astobebeyondthereachofmassexperimentorexactquantitativeassessment.Ofthiskindisthesubject matterofpsychotherapeutics,andthedifferencebetweentwobranchesofpsychologicalscience,oneofwhich workswithmeasurableunits,andtheotherdoesnot,isimmediatelyapparentonglancingatrepresentative samplesoftherelativeliteraturesandnotingthefrequencyofstatisticsintheoneandtheiralmostcomplete absenceintheother.Thisdoesnot,ofcourse,meanthatthepsychotherapistisdealingwithamassof phenomenasoheterogeneousastodefyclassification,ortopreventhimdrawingsignificantcorrelations betweenoneclassandanother,butthatitisbyqualitativereasoningthathemustreachhisconclusions. Medicalpsychologyandpsychicalresearchdeallargelywithexceptionalandpeculiarcasesandseektobuild upasystemoforganisedknowledgeoutofrefractorymaterialofthiskind.Historicallythetwolinesofenquiry, whenbothwerenew,ranclosetogether.Muchoftheirsubjectmatter,hypnotismforexample,wascommonto both,andmanyoftheearlyresearcherswereactiveinbothfields.Therewas,however,alwayssomedifference ofapproach,themedicalpsychologisthavingatendencytofocushisattentiononpathologicalmaterialwitha viewtoeffectingcures,whilethepsychicalresearchercouldnot,consistentlywiththetaskhehadundertaken, imposeanycomparablerestrictiononhisstudies.Itwasamatterofindifferencetohimwhethertherealor supposedfaculties,theevidenceastowhichhewasexamining,appearedtosuggestadeviationfortheworse fromaveragehumannature,orassomeoftheminfactdid,somethingagooddealbetter.Hehadoneconcern, andoneonly,toseethatallseriousevidencesuggestingthepossibleexistenceofhumanfacultiesnot recognisedbyotherbranchesofscienceorimperfectlyexploredbythem,wasexaminedbywhatevermethods ledtothefullestandmostaccurateknowledge. Thedifferenceofobjectivebetweenmedicalpsychologyandpsychicalresearchrevealsitselfinadifferenceof treatmentevenwhenbotharedealingwithidenticalmaterial.Takethecase,forexample,ofadreamrelatedtoa psychoanalystbyapatient,inwhichthepatientseesanearrelative,anuncleperhaps,runoverbyabus.This mayprovideanimportantcluetothepatient'ssuppressedwishesregardingtheseniormalemembersofhis family,andthatisthelineofenquirythattheanalyst,quiteproperlyforhispurpose,followsup.Itisfromhis pointofviewirrelevanttoenquirewhethertheunclewasinfactrunover,and,ifhewas,whetherthedetailsofthe accidentcorrespondedwiththoseinthedream.Thisontheotherhandisjustthepointofinteresttothe psychicalresearcher.Ifhehasreasontosupposetherewasacorrespondencebetweendreamandaccident,he cannotshirktheoftendifficultandtedioustaskofascertainingwhethertherewasinfactanycorrespondence and,ifso,howcloseitwas,andwhetheritcanreasonablybeattributedtothepatient'sknowledge(e.g.,ofhis

    uncle'shabits)ortochance.Toputitshortly,thepsychoanalystisconcernedwiththesubjectiveaspectofthe patient'sexperience,thepsychicalresearcherwithitspossibleobjectiveaspectasaninstanceofparanormal cognitionofakindtobediscussedlater.Foracompleteexplorationofourmentalactivitiesweneednotonly psychologyinitsmoregeneralformbutsuchspecialdevelopmentsofitasmedicalpsychologyand,ofequal importance,psychicalresearch. Psychicalresearchemploysdifferentmethodsaccordingtothemanydifferentkindsofmaterialthatitis investigating.Likeallotherorganisedenquiriesithasdevelopedaterminologyofitsown,ofwhichIshallmake assparingauseaspracticable,explaining,whentheyfirstoccur,suchtechnicaltermsasIhavenotbeenable toavoid.Inaccordancewiththeestablishedpracticeamongpsychicalresearchers,qualificationssuchas "alleged"or"ostensible"areforthesakeofbrevityomittedinthediscussionofrealorsupposedfacultiesor phenomena,exceptwheretheomissionmightcausemisunderstanding. Enoughhasalreadybeensaidastothemeaningofparanormalphenomena.Theprimarydivisionofthemisinto "mental"and"physical",clumsytermsforwhich,weretheynotsowellestablished,ingenuityandaGreek lexiconcoulddoubtlessfindsubstitutes.Thedistinctionbetweenthetwoclassesiseasilyillustratedby comparingandcontrasting"telepathy"and"telekinesis".Ifthementalcontentoftwoormorepersonsisinwhole orinpartthesameincircumstanceswhichdonot,whenexamined,offeranadequateexplanationbythenormal meansofcommunication,suchasspeechandwriting,norbychancecoincidence,noryetbythenatural associationofideasderivingfromacommonnormalknowledgeoffacts,thisiscalledtelepathy.Aninstanceof telepathyis,sofarascanbeascertained,amentaleventonly,sinceithasnopatentcounterpartinthe physicalworld.If,asissometimessupposed,thereisaphysicalbasisfortelepathy,"waves"forexample,ithas notbeenobservedandremainsatthebestaninference.Inreportsoftelekinesisontheotherhandan observablephysicaleventhastobeexplained,whetherornottheevidencewhenexaminedpointstothe operationofsomeforcewhichcouldbecalled"paranormal"asbeingunrecognisedbyscience. Again,phenomena,whethermentalorphysical,canbeclassifiedaccordingtotheconditionsinwhichtheyare observedasspontaneous,mediumisticandexperimental.Theword"spontaneous"explainsitself.Forexample, someoneperceivesanapparitionwithoutanyeffortorintentiononhispart.Sofarasheisconcerned,itis spontaneous,whateverintentionorimpulseonthepartofsomeoneelsemaypossiblybebehindit. Attheotherendofthescaleistheexperimentalevidence.Theidealscientificexperimentisoneinwhichthe materialiswhollywithintheexperimenter'scontrol,sothathecanapplywhateverconditionshewishes,can exactlymeasuretheresultsundervaryingconditions,andcanrepeattheexperimentwiththeassurancethat underthesameconditionshewillgetthesameresults.Whenhumanbeingsarethesubjectmatterthatideal, asalreadystated,isunattainable,thoughitispossibleforthepsychologisttomeasurewithafairamountof accuracytheactionsofhumanbeingsunderconditionswhichhecantoaconsiderableextentcontrolandvary, solongassuchactionsdependonfacultiesthatareuniversaloratleastwidelyspread,sothathisresultscan becheckedbyotherexperimentersworkingwithsimilarmaterial.Facultiesthatcanbeinvestigatedinthisway becomesoonerorlater,andafterlessormoreoppositionfromorthodoxy,incorporatedinofficialscience,and soipsofactopassoutoftheprovinceofthepsychicalresearcher.Thehistoryofhypnotismillustratesthat process. Whilesomeinterestingresultshavebeenobtainedinpsychicalresearchthroughexperimentswithgroupsof subjectsandthisisthetypeofexperimentwhichapproachesnearesttotherepeatableinvestigationismainly concernedwithindividualsubjectsendowedwithexceptionalpowersfortheproductionofphenomena,mentalor physical.Somesubjectsareabletoproducepositiveresultsunderconditionsadequate,sofarasthe investigatorandhisreaderscanjudge,fortheeliminationnotonlyofdeliberatedeceptionbythesubject,but alsooftheinnocentproductionbynormalmeansofeffectsthatcouldbemistakenforparanormal.Results obtainedwithindividualsubjectsunderconditionsreachingthisstandardmaybeclassedasexperimental,even though,forthereasonsalreadygiven,therehasbeennorepeatableexperiment. Withothersubjectstheinvestigatormayhavetomakethebestcompromiseastoconditionsthathecan,orhe mayevenhavetoacceptthephenomenaastheycome,andreservehiscriticalfacultiesfortheappraisementof theresults.Thereisthereforeaverywiderangeofconditionsgoverningtheproductionofparanormalphenomena byexceptionallyendowedsubjects.Butitwouldbeamistaketosetoutthephenomenainascaleof descendingevidentialvalue,beginningwiththefullyexperimental,andpassingthroughthesemiexperimentalto thespontaneous,withouttakingintoaccountotherfactors.Dothephenomenaconformastogeneraltypeto otherphenomenasupportedbyindependentevidence,orarewedealingwithsomeunparalleledlususNaturae? And(amoreembarrassingquestion),towhatextentdoestheevidencedependonthegoodfaithoftheparties concerned,andhowfarcantheirgoodfaithbereasonablyassumed?

    Itwillbeseenfromtheforegoingthatinmostbranchesofpsychicalresearchtheenquirer,whenassessinghis materialandattemptingtoarrangeitinorder,findshimselfinaverydifferentsituationfromthatofthechemist, physicist,orbiologist.Hehastoformajudgmentofthecharacterandqualitiesofthepersonswhosereportson phenomenaheisstudying,oftheirintegrity,theircarefulnessasobserversandrecorders,theirCompetenceto distinguishthetruefromthespurious.Whenheissatisfiedthathehasgotattherealfactshemustthen considerwhethertheyadmitofanormalexplanationsuch,forexample,aschancecoincidence.Where experimentshavebeenframed,asmanyexperimentsintelepathyandkindredfacultieshavebeen,insucha wayastoproduceresultscapableofstatisticalanalysis,theproblemofchanceisfairlyeasy,butformuchof hismaterialeventhisguidewillbelacking,andhemustdependonhisowncommonsense.Therewilltherefore inevitablybeasubjectiveelementinhisconclusions. Thisweaknessmustberecognisedbutshouldnotbeexaggerated.Theresearcheroftodaycanbuildonthe experienceextendingovernearlyeightyyearsofalonglineofpredecessors.Manyofthesewereeminentin variousbranchesofscience.Othershaddistinguishedthemselvesinpublicaffairsorbusiness,careersinwhich successdependsonmakingcorrectlythesamesortofjudgmentsofmenandeventsthat,inpsychical research,appraisaloftheevidenceoftendemands.Itisthereforepossibletomakeusetodayofvarious techniquesskilfullyelaboratedoverthislongperiodforthepurposeofavoidingerrorsduetofaultyobservation,to lapsesofmemory,toinsufficiencyofwrittenrecordandtodeception,deliberateorsubconscious. Themassofmaterialthathasbeeninvestigatedduringallthistimealsoprovidesacheckonwhatcanwith confidencebeacceptedasthebasisfortheory.InthisrespectthepublicationsoftheSPRhaveaunique importance.Ithasanunbrokenhistorysince1882,atnopointofwhichhasitfallenunderthecontrolofcranks ordoctrinaires.Theeminentmenandwomenwhohaveguidedithavedifferedwidelyamongthemselvesintheir opinionsbothastodetailsofevidenceandonlargerissues,suchassurvival.Everythingthatithaspublished hasfirstbeenscrutinisedbyanexperiencedandcriticalcommittee.TheSPRpublicationshaveindeedno monopolyofvalue:much,forexample,ofthehighestqualityhascomefromAmerica.NordoIclaimthatallthe evidencepublishedbytheSPRisabovecriticismIshallinfactmyselfcriticisesomepartsofit.Butfora combinationofquantity,varietyandqualitytheSPRliteratureiswithoutarivalandnowriterneedapologiseifhe takesitasthemainsourceoftheevidencehecitestosupportandillustratehisargument.Examinationofthe materialrecordedinthisliteratureshowsthatmostofitsortsitselfoutintocertainclasses,andthatmostofthe itemsconformtocertaintypes,whichsoonbecomefamiliartothepsychicalresearcherandareeasily recognisedbyhimwhenhemeetsthemagainandagain.Beforeanypieceofrecordedevidenceisusedtobuild anargumenton,itshouldbesubjecttoadoublescrutiny: (1)Doesitinallsubstantialrespects complywiththecanonsofevidencegenerallyacceptedinpsychical research?(Formaldefectsdonotnecessarilyvitiatetherecord,butthisdictummustbeappliedwithcautionand commonsense.) (2)Doestheoccurrencerecordedshowageneralcorrespondencewithotherrecordedoccurrencesthatare individuallywellevidenced? Ifanitempasseboththesetestsmeisjustifiedinembodyingitinone'sargument.Ifitfailsbadlyinthefirst test,itisuselessforthatpurpose,thoughitmaydogoodinsharpeningone'swatchfulnessforbetterevidenced instancesofthesametype.Ifitpassesthefirsttestbutfailsatthesecond,whatistobedone?Asmostofthe materialofpsychicalresearchisexceptional,itwouldbemonstroustorejectabsolutelyanitemthatwas otherwisewellauthenticatedbecauseitwasexceptionallyexceptional.Theonlyreasonablecourseseemsto metobetotakecarefulnoteofit,buttokeepitinasortofquarantineuntilenoughparallelshaveoccurredto showthatitisnotjustaslipofthekindtowhichevenexperiencedenquirersapplyingwelltestedmethodsmay beprone,butagenuineinstanceofanoveltypeforwhichaplacewillhavetobefoundinanytheoretical structure.Ifhoweveralltheinvestigationthatisconstantlyproceedingintospontaneouscases,allthe experiments,allthesittingswithmediums,donotwithinareasonabletimeproduceparallelssupportedbygood evidence,theanomalousinstancehadbetterbeconsignedtolimbo. Tosupportmyargument,sofarasitispositive,Ishallnotuseanymaterialthatdoesnotseemtometopass boththesetestsorthatmyjudgmentrejectsorhesitatestoacceptmmoregeneralgrounds.Inextenuationof thisegotismitmightbesaidthatthematerialusedbymehasbeenacceptedbyotherpsychicalresearchersof greatereminence.Thereremainstheproblemofhowmanyandwhatinstancestoputbeforethereader.To throwathimthethousandandonespontaneouscases,experimentalresultsandmediumisticrecordswhich mayhaveinfluencedthewriterwouldmerelybefoghim,unlesstheywereaccompaniedbyacommentary severaltimesaslong,whichwouldborehimtoextinction.Wherethematterisofakindthathasbeen

    abundantlydiscussedinrecenttimesthereisnopointinquotingmoreinstancesthanarerequiredtoillustrate theargument.Foramoredetailedexaminationoftheevidencereferencecanbemadetootherliterature.Less familiarmaterial,ontheotherhand,requiresfullertreatment,asitreceivesinsomeofthelaterchaptersofthis book. Butmyargumenthasanegativeside,too,andindevelopingthisIhavesetoutandanalysedsomematerial whichIdefinitelydonotaccept.TohaveomitteditwouldhavelaidmeopentothechargeeitherthatIwas ignorantofwhatsomepeopleholdtobevitalevidence,orthatithadbeensuppressedbecauseittoldagainst myargument.Herealsosomeselectionhasbeennecessary.Severalviewsthatseemtomeerroneousare eachofthemheldonthestrengthofseveralpiecesofevidencethatseemtomedefectiveorspurious.Acriticof theseviewscannotreasonablyberequiredtodemolisheachseveralpieceinturn.Hehasdischargedhisdutyif hegoesstraightforthebestknowninstancesandthosetowhichtheadherentsoftheseviewsattachthe greatestweight. Muchofthisbook,especiallyoftheearlierpartofit,isnegative.FromthefoundationoftheSPRin1882ithas beennecessarytoclearawaycontinuallytheaccumulationsofcredulity,hearsayand(itmustbeadded)fraud. Onlybysodoinghavetheremarkablepositiveachievementsofpsychicalresearchbeenpossible.Anegative attitudeinitselfmakesnoappealtome,myonlydesirebeingtoadvance,ifitbebutalittle,positiveknowledge ofasubjectofsupremeimportance.

    Chapter3:Apparitions
    W.H.Salter ONEOFtheearliestandmostpersistentviewsastowhatfollowsonthedeathofthebodyoffleshand bloodisthatthedeadcontinuetoexistinanotherbodycloselyresemblinginappearancetheonethathasdied, thatcanmakeitselfseenandheardbytheliving,thatcanoccupyapositioninspaceandmove,butthatisnot subjecttoallthelimitationsofordinarymatter.Thoughitcantouchtheliving,itcannotusuallybegraspedby themanditcanpassthroughsolidwallsandcloseddoors.Variousnames,withslightlydifferentshadesof meaning,suchas"astral","etheric","metethedal",havebeenappliedtothisconception.Ishallusethe inclusive,noncommittalterm"quasimaterial". Untilrecenttimesthisopinionrestedalmostentirelyonapparitionsseenorheardataboutthetimeofthedeath, orafterit,ofsomepersonwhomtheyinsomewayresembled,toputitshortlyonghosts,whichareamongthe oldestofhumanexperiences.Theearliestaccountswhichhavecomedowntousarenotreportedatfirsthand bythepercipient,butarepoeticfictionsdoubtlessbasedonthepopularbeliefofthetime.Theearlierthe narrativethecloseritcomestorealexperience,asestablishedbymodernenquiry.Takeforcomparisontwo ghoststoriestoldbytwogreatpoets,thesecondwritingmorethantwothousandyearsafterthefirst,the appearanceofPatroclusinthe23rdbookoftheIliad,andthatofthedeadkinginHamlet. TheghostofPatroclusisalmostcompletelyrealistic,andcouldbeparalleledfrommanycasesreportedtothe SPRduringthelastgeneration.Itresemblesthedeadmaninheight,feature,voiceand,significantly,inthe clothesworn.Afterithasspoken,atalengthof23lines,theonlydeparturefromrealism,itslipsfromAchilles' grasplikesmoke,leavingnotracebehind:allperfectlynormal. Shakespeare'saccountisagreatdealmoreimpressive,andforthatreasonlessrealistic.Thedeadkingisseen severaltimes,oftenbutnotalwaysinthesameplace.Wheretwoormorepersonsarepresentheisseen sometimesbyallofthem,sometimesbyoneonly.Hegivesalonganddetailedaccountofthemannerofhis death,statingfactsunknowntohishearer,butlaterfoundtobetrue.Foreveryseparatepointinthestory,the recurrenceinaspecifiedplace,the"collective"perception,thetransmissionoftrueinformationunknowntothe hearer,aparallelinstance,wellormoderatelywellestablished,couldbefound.Butthestorytakenasawhole isjustthesortofthingthateverypsychicalresearcherwouldgiveuntoldtime,troubleandmoneytoinvestigate, ifonlyhecouldgetthechance,whichheneverdoes. Ifhoweverheshouldhesolucky,thereareseveralquestionshewouldhavetoputtoBernardo,Marcellus, Hamletandtherest."Collective"cases,i.e.,whereanapparitionisseenbymorethanonepersonatthesame time,beinguncommonandthepsychologyofthemobscure,hewouldwishtoaskBernardoandMarcellus, whichofthemfirstsawthefigure,whichfirstrecogniseditasthedeadKing?Didhesayordoanythingthat mighthavepromptedtheothertoseeorrecogniseit?Weretheglimpsesofthemoonsufficienttogivethema clearview?HowmuchRhenishhadtheydrainedbeforegoingonduty?Allthesequestionscouldbeput,and answered,withoutleavingthedomainofthe"normal"asalreadydefined,howeverextraordinarytheaffairwas. AstotheKing'sdeath,andtheghost'saccountofit,howmuchofthatlongspeechdidHamletgetdownonhis tablets?Ishesurethathehadnotalreadyheardrumoursorentertainedsuspicionsastohowhisfatherdied? Whatassurancehashethatthedeathreallyhappenedasstatedbytheghost?OnthelastpointHamletwould doubtlessrefertoClaudius'sreactionto"theMousetrap"andifhecouldmeettheothertwopointsequallywell, thecasewouldcallforaparanormalexplanation.Therepsychicalresearchwouldhavetostop.Ordinaryenquiry astothefactscouldgonofurther. "Bethouaspiritofhealthorgoblindamned, Bringwiththeeairsofheavenorblastsfromhell?" Thatisaquestionwhichcouldonlybeansweredonthesupernaturalplane,andthereforenotonethatpsychical researchwouldattempttoput.Thecaseisinfactagoodillustrationofhowasingleoccurrencemayraise normal,paranormalandsupernaturalquestions,andoftheboundarybetweenwhatisandwhatisnottheproper provinceofpsychicalresearch. Itisclear,fromthewaythestoryistold,thatitwouldhavebeenacceptedbyShakespeare'scontemporaries,

    thoughwithsomereservationsonthepartofthemoresophisticated.ButhewroteontheeveoftheAgeof Reasonwhenitbecamethefashiontodecryastheproductofvulgarcredulityanynarrativethatdidnot harmonisewithcurrentscientifictheory,orbyhookorcrooktoexplainitawaysomehow. Asagoodspecimenofthisprocessonemaytaketheexperiencerecordedsixtytwoyearsafterithappenedby LordBroughaminhisMemoirs.Accordingtothesehewas,asayoungmanoftwentyone,travellinginSweden inDecember1799.Onreachinghisinnafteralongday'sjourneyhetookahotbathand,whilelyinginit,he sawafriendG.,aformerfellowstudentatEdinburghUniversity,sittingonachair,lookingcalmlyathim. "HowIgotoutofthebathIknownot,butonrecoveringmysensesIfoundmyselfsprawlingonthe floor.Theapparition,orwhateveritwas,thathadtakenthelikenessofG.,haddisappeared." WhenG.andhehadbothbeenstudentstheyhaddrawnupanagreement,writtenwiththeirblood,that whicheverdiedthefirstshouldappeartotheother.G.hadgonetoIndia,andafterafewyearsBroughamhad almostforgottenhim. Broughamcouldnotbringhimselftotalkofthevisioneventothefriendtravellingwithhim.In1862hewrote: "Ihavejustbeencopyingoutfrommyjournaltheaccountofthisstrangedream:Certissimamortis imago!Andnowtofinishthestorybegunsixtyyearssince.SoonaftermyreturntoEdinburgh, therearrivedaletterfromIndia,announcingG.'sdeath,andstatingthathehaddiedonthe19thof December! "Singularcoincidence!Yetwhenonereflectsonthevastnumbersofdreamswhichnightafter nightpassthroughourbrains,thenumberofcoincidencesbetweenthevisionandtheeventare perhapsfewerandlessremarkablethanafaircalculationofchanceswouldwarrantustoexpect." (SeePhantasmsoftheLiving,vol.Ipp.395,6) NowwhateverpreciselyBrougham'spsychologicalstatewaswhenhesawG.,hewascertainlynothavingan ordinarydream.Itisnotacommonincidentofdreamlifethatmakesamangetoutofabathandsprawl unconsciousonthefloor.Thefrequencyofdreams,bywhichBrougham.seekstoreducehisexperiencetothe commonplaceandnormal,isthereforequitebesidethepoint.Itcouldonlybepossiblyrelevantifnodistinction weredrawnbetweenvagueandincoherentdreamsontheonehand,andprecise,realisticdreamsontheother. Thetalkabout"afaircalculation"ismerebluff,sincethematerialsforsuchacalculationwouldbeimpossibleto obtain,andifinfactsuchacalculationhadbeenmadeandhadshownthecoincidencestobefewerthan chanceexpectation,therewouldstillbeaproblemcallingforexplanation.ThataformerLordChancellor,the leaderofthe"MarchofMind",shouldfumblehisargumentinthisway,showsthestrengthofthethenprevailing biasagainstanythingthatmightnowbetermedparanormal. Thestory,ifBrougham'snarrativeinspiresmoreconfidencethanhisreasoning,isagoodexampleofaveridical crisisapparition,thatistosaythatbysomemeansotherthananyoftheordinarymeansofcommunicationit transmitsvisuallyfactsnotnormallyknowntothepercipientrelatingtoacrisisinvolvinganotherpersonwhois visuallyrepresented.Thistypeofcaseissocentraltothewholeproblemofapparitionsastoimpelmeto attemptthisformaldefinitionofit.Instancesofthetypeoccurfrequentlyintheliterature,wherethediligent readermaylookforthem.HavingsetoutBrougham'scasewithsomefullness,Ishalldiscussthetyperather thanseparateexamplesofit,exceptwherethesepresentspecialdistinctivefeatures.Thetypeincludescases wheretheexperienceisauditoryortactileinsteadof,oraswellas,visual. BeforehoweverleavingBrougham'scaseitistobenotedthat,howevergoodanexampleitmaybeofatypeof experience,itisanextremelybadexampleofhowexperiencesshouldberecorded.Hehasleftnorecordofthe experienceotherthanonewrittensixtytwoyearslater.Accordingtothatrecord,henotedthevisioninhisdiary, whichwassofargood,butmadenoattempttogetthedateconfirmedbyhistravellingcompanion.Thereisno independentcorroborationoftheletterfromIndiaannouncingG.'sdeath,norareanyparticularsgivenastojust whatitsaidorthedateBrougham.learntofit. Defectssuchastheseandthemanifolderrorsduetothemdiscreditedstoriesofghostsandofother occurrencesthatcouldnotbeforcedwithintheframeworkofcurrentscientificdoctrine,andbroughtonthemthe stigmaof"anecdotalism",whichisstill,absurdlyenough,imputedtoaccountsdealingwithsimilarsubjects, howevercarefullytheymayhavebeenrecorded,andhowevercriticallyinvestigated.Forthepersistent disparagementofthemdidnotpreventthesethingshappening,andhappeningtopersonswhocouldnotbe

    lightlybrushedasideasincompetentorcredulouswitnesses.WhenthereforetheSPRwasfoundedin1882,it wasnaturalthatitsverywideprogrammeofresearchshouldincludeanenquiryintoasubjectinwhichmuch materiallayreadytohandintheformofalreadyreportedexperiences,andmorecouldeasilybeobtained.But asanessentialfirststepitwasnecessarytolookcloselyintotheevidentialweaknessesthathadbroughtthe traditionalghoststoryintodisrepute,andtoformulateaprocedureforeliminatingthem. Therearemanycollectionsofghoststoriesandother"spontaneouscases",buttherearethreepublicationsof theSPRwhichbyreasonofthenumberofcasessetout,andthecareandskillwithwhichtheywereverified andanalysed,areofexceptionalimportance.ThefirstisPhantasmsoftheLiving(1886)ofwhichEdmund Gurneywasthemainauthor,withMyersandPodmoreascoadjutors.Althougheveryeffortwasmadetoverify thecasessetoutinit,someofthemweretoooldtobeunreservedlyaccepted.Themainimportanceofthe bookarisesfromtheanalysisofthedifferentsourcesoferrorthathaddiscreditedcasesofthiskind,andthe puttingforwardofahypothesisthatwouldcoverthecases,ormostofthecases,thatsurvivedcritical examination. NextintimeistheReportontheCensusofHallucinations(1894,Proc .X),inwhichamuchlargernumberof cases,andrecentcases,wereexaminedinaccordancewiththeprinciplesestablishedbyPhantasms ,sothatit becamepossibletodeterminemoreexactlyhowfarchancecoincidencewasasufficientexplanationof correspondences,likethatinBrougham'scase,betweenexperienceandevent.Then,afternearlytwentyyears inwhichknowledgeofparanormalfacultieshadbeengreatlyextended,Mrs.HenrySidgwickcollectedand classifiedallthecaseswhichhadbeenprivatelyprintedintheSociety'sJournalbutnotpublishedanywhere (1923,Proc .XXXIII).Thelapseoftimebetweenthisandtheearliercollectionsmakesitpossibletojudgehowfar theprogressofenquirysupports,orfailstosupport,typesofexperiencesparselyordubiouslyrepresentedin them. Themainsourcesoferror,asshowninPhantasms ,are (1)faultyobservation,duetothepercipient'semotionalstate,hiscarelessness,ortheconditionsinwhichthe experienceoccurs,suchaspoorlight (2)absenceofsatisfactoryconfirmationoftheexperience,eitherbyawrittennotemadeatthetime,orbya statementmadetoanindependentwitness (3)faultsofmemory,especiallywherethereisnosufficientrecordinwriting (4)failuretoverifywithcaretheeventwithwhichtheexperienceissupposedtocorrespond. Themainrulestobefollowedtocurethesedefectsaresimpletostatebutnotalwayseasytoapplyorenforce. First,theessentialpointsoftheexperiencemustbestatedandindependentlyconfirmedbeforethe correspondingeventisknowntothepercipientsecond,theremustbesatisfactoryevidencethatatthetimehe statedhisexperiencehehadnonormalknowledgeoftheeventnorcouldhaverationallyinferredit,amatteron whichonemaysometimeshavetorelyonthepercipient'swordthird,theeventmustbeverifiedtoshowthat thecorrespondenceisreal. Thenextpointtobeconsiderediswhether,whereacaseisevidentiallysound,orisonlyformallyand superficiallydefective,thecorrespondenceofexperienceandeventcanreasonablybeassignedtochance coincidence.AnanalysisbytheauthorsofPhantasms ofthe5,000(approximately)wakingexperiences collectedinresponsetoaquestionnaire,andofasimilarnumberofdreamscollectedinthesameway, suggestedthatsomethingmorethanchancecoincidencewasatwork.TheReportoftheCensus,withrecords of17,000wakingexperiencestoanalyse,cametothesameconclusion.TheCommitteethatdraftedtheReport pointedoutthatthequestionwouldonlybesettledbyselectingacoincidencebetweentwodefiniteeventsand seeinghowoftenitwouldoccurbychance,andhowoftenitactuallydoesoccur.Thetwoeventstheyselected were: (1)visionsofarecognisedpersonseenbyawakingpercipientwithintwelvehoursofthedeathofthatperson, thedeathbeingneitherknowntothepercipientnorexpectedbyhimwithsuchvisionsweregroupedauditory andtactileexperiencesofthesamesort: (2)thedeathoftherecognisedperson. Thereportsetsoutfullytheelaboratestatisticalprocessthattheanalysisinvolved.Itcanbesummarisedby

    sayingthatcorrespondencesbetweenthesetwoeventswerefoundtobe440timesasnumerousasmighthave beenexpectedifnothingbutchancehadtobetakenintoaccount. BothinPhantasms andintheCensusReporttherearemanyinterestingtablesofstatistics,showinge.g.the relativefrequencyofvisualandauditoryexperiences,andoftherealistic,semirealisticandsymbolicaltypesof therelationsbetweenagentandpercipient:oftheproportionsofmaleandfemalepercipients,andsoon.The mostimportantoftheseisthetableintheCensusReportthatshowsthataboutoneintenofthe17,000 personsaskedwhether,toputthequestionshortly,theyhadhadaparanormalexperiencewhenfullyawake, answeredyesthatoneintwentyofthemhadseenarealisticapparitionandoneinthirtyarealisticapparition ofarecognisedperson. Wherehoweverthequestioniswhetheranoccurrenceisfortuitousornot,statisticsareofhelponlywhenthe enquiryhasbeenplannedsoastoleaduptoquantitativeassessment,ashasbeendoneinmanyrecent experimentsinESP.Inotherlinesofenquiry,however,suchasthosethatrelatetospontaneousexperiences andsittingswithmediums,statisticsareoflittlevalue.Suchmaterialfallswithincertaingeneralclasses,from whichsomegeneralprinciplescanbededuced,butthedetailsvaryfrominstancetoinstancesoastodefy quantitativeappraisal,andthevariationmaybeassignificantastheinstance'sconformitywithageneraltype. Butaftermakingallowanceforthis,thefiguresoftheCensusReportmaybeacceptedasshowingtheveridical deathcoincidencesarenotfortuitous.Whatthenisthecauseofthem?Thetraditionalanswerwasthatthedead personwaslocallypresentinabodyhavingsome,butnotall,ofthequalitiesofordinarymatter,includingthatof beingperceivedbythesensesoftheliving.Butthisviewpresentsmanydifficulties.Inwellestablishedcases, forinstance,theapparitionleavesnotracebehindattheendoftheexperience. Apparitionsareusuallyclothedandaresometimesaccompaniedbyvisionaryobjectsresemblingthosethey usedintheirformerlife.Haveallthesethingsalsoquasimaterialcounterpartsthatcontinuetheirprevious associationwiththequasimaterialbodyofthedead? Thereisnoclearcutdivisionbetweenapparitionsandalargenumberofothernonfortuitousexperiencesto whichthehypothesisofaquasimaterialbodycannotreadilybeapplied.Onemaymentionvisionsthatareonly inpartrealistic,aswhereamaninahotelbedroomsawaportraitofhisfatheroccupyingtheframeofapicture atatimewhenhisfatherwasdyingmanyhundredsofmilesawayorsymbolicvisions,aswhereamourning band"seen"roundatophat,butnotinfactthere,portendedadeathordreams,suchasthosecollectedin Phantasms orexperiencesthatarenever"externalised"toanyofthesenses,intuitionsthatmaybejustas definiteandveridicalasarealisticapparition. Whilenoneofthesedifficultiesmaybeconclusiveagainstthequasimaterialhypothesis,whichisinfactheldby someseriousstudents,ithasbeenacceptedbymostpsychicalresearchersthattheseexperiencestakeplace "inthemind'seye",butarenonethelessobjective.ascorrespondingtosomethingrealbutexternaltothe percipient'snormalknowledgeorexpectation. TheauthorsofPhantasms advancedthehypothesisthatapparitions(1)weretelepathicimpressionstransmitted bythepersonrepresentedinthem,calledthe"agent",tothepercipient'smindandexternalisedasavisual hallucination.Thislastword,itmaybedesirabletoemphasise,meanssimplythe"apparentperceptionof externalobjectnotactuallypresent"(ConciseOxfordDictionary),althoughoftencarelesslyusedtoimply weaknessofmind.Thisviewwouldbringthemintolinewiththosesemirealistic,symbolicandintuitional experiencesanddreamswithwhichtheysharethequalityofbeingveridical,andwouldgetovertheother difficultiesmentionedwithregardtothehypothesisofthelocalpresenceofaquasimaterialbody.
    (1)ForthesakeofsimplicityIomitreferenc etotheauditoryandtac tilecases,whic hareinageneralwayparallel.

    Thehallucinatoryviewofapparitionswasnotnewthetelepathicviewofthemwas,hazardouslysoinfact,asat thedateofPhantasms theexperimentalevidencefor"thoughttransference",tousethetermthencurrent,left muchtobedesiredbothastoquantityandquality.Thepositionisnowquitedifferent,andtheliteratureon experimentaltelepathyisvoluminous.Someexperimentshavebeenconductedwith"free"material,theagent choosinganyoneoutofanunlimitednumberof"targets"forthepercipienttoaimat.Thebestknown experimentsofthistypewerethoseinwhichGilbertMurraywasthepercipient,andthetargetswereincidentsof reallife,imaginaryepisodes,pictures,scenesfrombooks.ForreportsofthemseeProc .XXIX,46109XXXIV,2 12JournalXXXII,29. Inotherexperimentsthenumberoftargetsislimited,e.g.,fivegeometricalsymbols.Itisthereforepossibleto

    estimatepreciselytheprobabilitythattheresultsofaseriesofattemptsatthemwereorwerenotdueto chance.Thisisnotpossiblewith"free"material,andthemethodisaccordinglybetteradaptedtoprovingthat telepathyisarealfaculty,especiallytoprovingittopeoplewhorightlyorwronglydistrusttheirabilitytojudge theevidencebytheirowncommonsense.ThebestknowninvestigatorswhohaveemployedthismethodareJ. B.RhineinAmericaandS.G.SoalintheUnitedKingdom,eachofwhomhasrecordedhisresultsinseveral books. Ifinstancesoftelepathyare,asIbelievethemtobe,commonenough,theconceptissoatvariancewiththe generallyacceptedprinciplesofscience,thatnomethodsofenquiryintoitoughttobeneglected.The quantitativemethodisthemoreconclusiveastotherealityoftelepathy,thequalitativethemoreinformativeas tohowitworks. Theconflictwithgeneralscientificopinionisduetotheabsenceofanyphysicalmechanismtoaccountforthe transmissionfromagenttopercipient.Ithasindeedbeenheldbysomestudentsthattransmissioniseffected through"waves"ofsomekind.Itisnotfataltothisviewthatthe"waves"cannotatpresentbespecified,asnew formsofradiationareconstantlybeingdiscovered.Butthereareother,morefundamental,objections.Noone haseverpointedtoanyorganinthehumanbodycapableoftransmittingorreceivinganysortofwaveovermore thantriflingdistances.Mostseriousofall,everynormalmodeoftransmittingmessagesdependsonsome prearrangedcodeunderstoodbybathparties.Ifthereweresuchatelepathiccodeitwouldhavetobeone capableofputtingovercomplexideasandelaboratementalimages,asinexperimentssuchasthosewith GilbertMurray,orinsomeofthecasesofcrisisapparitions.Whatthenisthecode?Whoformulatedit?Howdid itbecomeintelligibleasbetweenagentsandpercipientshavingnonormalknowledgeofit? Thenthereisthequestionofwhetheritisaffectedbythedistancebetweenagentandpercipient.Itiseffective overgreatdistances,assomeofthespontaneouscasesshow,apparitionsofpersonsdyinginAustraliabeing seeninEngland.Buttherelativeeffectivenessoverlongandshortdistancescanonlybetestedbyexperiment. Comparisonoflongdistanceandshortdistanceexperimentalresultssuggeststhatthereissomereductionin effectivenessintheformer,buttherearetoomanyvariablesinvolvedtomakethecomparisonconclusive.It cannothoweverbeconfidentlyassertedthattelepathyinfringesthe"lawofinversesquares". Theearlyconceptionoftelepathywasthatitwasaonewayprocessbetweenasingleagentandasingle percipient.Thisismuchtoosimpletofitthematerialwithwhichthepsychicalresearchernowhastodeal, Somespontaneouscases,forinstance,arereciprocal,theagentbeingalsoapercipient,andthepercipientan agent.Casesofthistypewere,whenPhantasms appeared,sorarethattheauthorsdoubtedtheirgenuineness. ThetypewashoweverwellestablishedwhenMrs.SidgwickwroteherreportinProc .XXXIII.Shecites,for instance,areciprocaldreamexperienceoftwofriendswhohadvividdreamsonthesamenightinwhichthey eachthoughttheystoodinadarkwood,wheretheotheralsowas:oneofthemshookatree,theleavesof whichturnedintoflame.Commentingonthesecases,Mrs.Sidgwickwrote(p.419): "Ithinkthekindofunionofminds,thethinkingandfeelingtogether,hereshownmayberegarded asthetypeornormoftelepathiccommunicationtowhichallothercasesconforminvarying degrees." Sheaddedthatitwasin"collective"cases,inwhichseveralpercipientssharedthesameexperience,thatthis couldperhapsbemostclearlyseen,andshecalledittransfusionratherthantransmissionofthought.Tyrrellin hisApparitions (1943,revisededition1953)arguedthatevenincasesthatwereneither"collective"nor reciprocalthedramaticpresentationofthetelepathicimpulseimpliedsomecollaborationbetweenagentand percipient. Collaborationwouldbesubconsciousonthepercipient'spart,andinmost,perhapsinallcasesontheagent's. Insomeinstancesofcrisisapparitionsaconsciousdesiretocommunicatewiththepercipientisshownbythe agent'scryingoutthepercipient'sname.Inothercasesthereisnosuchdirectevidence.Adesireto communicatemaybeinferredfromthefactthatamessageisactuallytransmitted,buttheimpulseseemsto havebeenpurelysubconscious,andevenwheresomeconsciousdesireisshownitmaywellhavebeenmade effectivebysubconsciousactivity. Thisbookwillbelargelyoccupiedwithaccountsofthemanyandvariedfunctionsofthesubconscious,butfor thepresentitissufficienttomakeitclearinwhatsensethatwordisused.Itisdesirabletogiveanametoall thatregionofthemindwhichliesoutsideofimmediateawarenessandbeyondthereachofeasyrecallto consciousmemory.Theword"subliminal"wasusedbyMyersandmanyotherswithmuchthesamemeaning, buthadthedisadvantageofconfusionwith"sublime"forthoseignorantofitsetymology,andofimporting,for

    thosebetterinformedonthispoint,themetaphorof"threshold",whichtoEnglishpeoplehaslittlerelevance.Itis moreimportanttoemphasisethedistinctionbetween"subconscious"asusedinthisbook,and"unconscious" asusedbytheFreudians.Thatthereisaregionofthemindhavingthequalitiestheydescribeasdistinctiveof the"unconscious"is,Ithink,established,butthesearenotcharacteristicofthe"subconscious"asawhole, exceptasregardsconativeactivity,whichisanimportantelementinbothconceptions. TheargumentofPhantasms atoneotherpointrestedonslightevidence.Ithadtoheshownthattelepathy,if acceptedasarealfaculty,couldproducerealisticapparitionsvisiblebyapercipientunawareoftheattempt.A fewsuccessfulexperimentsarequotedinPhantasms ,inonlyoneofwhichwastheagent'sintentiontoprojecta visionofhimselfconfirmedbyindependenttestimonybeforetheexperimentwasmade.Oneofthecaseswas laterfoundtobeahoax.AfewfairlygoodcaseswerereportedtotheSPRinthelatteryearsofthe19th century,butMrs.Sidgwickwritingin1923couldfindnoreportslaterthan1900.Theexperimentalevidenceis goodenoughtoexemptitfromsummaryrejection,buthardlygoodenoughtosupportsoimportantapartofthe argument.Itistobehopedthatthefurtherexperimentsnowcontemplatedwillthrowmorelightonthisproblem, butifitisacorrectviewthatinthespontaneouscasesitistheagent'ssubconsciousthatiseffective,then failureinconsciouslydirectedexperimentswouldnotfurtherweakentheargument,sincethereisgoodreason tobelievethatthesubconscioushaspowersexceedingthoseoftheconsciousmind. TheargumentofPhantasms ,notwithstandingthisweakness,hasbeengenerallythoughnotunanimously acceptedbypsychicalresearchers,sofaratleastasregardssingleapparitionsseenbyasinglepercipient, whicharemuchthemostcommontypeofexperience.Isharewithoutreservethemajorityview.Butthereare other,rarer,types,towhichtheargumentcannotwithoutdifficultybemadetoextend,andthesewillbe discussedinthenextchapter.

    Chapter4:Apparitions:SomeSpecialTypes
    W.H.Salter THEQUESTIONisoftenraisedastowhetherapparitionsareobjective,andthiscanonlybeansweredby thefurtherquestionastowhatsense"objective"istoreceive.Apparitions,aswasshowninthepreceding chapter,arefairlycommon,andthoseofrecognisedpersonsnotverymuchrarer.Butveridicalapparitions, correspondingtosomeverifiableeventoutsidethepercipient'snormalknowledgeorinference,formaverymuch smallerclass.Theycannotbeconsidered,astheothertwoclassesmight,asbeginningandendingwithinthe percipient'smind,conditionedperhaps,asmanydreamsare,byinternalconflicts,butunrelatedtoanything externaltohispersonality.Theyhavethereforeasortofobjectivitythatcannotbeclaimedfortheothers. Butthosewhoraisethequestionprobablyhaveamorematerialisticconceptionofobjectivityinview,andthey pointtocertaintypesofapparitionswhichdonotseemamenabletothetelepathichypothesis.Therearethree principaltypeswhichtheyspecify:(a)"collective"apparitions,i.e.,suchasareseenbymorethanone percipientatthesametime:(b)"iterative"apparitions,touseProfessorBroad'sphrase,i.e.,suchasareseen onmorethanoneoccasionwhetherbythesameordifferentpercipients:(c)apparitionsseenaconsiderable timeafterthedeathoftheagentandconveyinginformationoutsidethepercipient'snormalknowledgeor inference,astothingsthathavehappenedsincetheagent'sdeath.Thesethreetypeswillbeconsideredinthat order. AstothenatureofcollectivecasesGurneyandMyersexpresseddifferentopinionsinPhantasms .Gurney's viewwasthatperceptionspreadfromthepercipientwhofirsthadtheexperiencetotheothersbytelepathic infection,sotospeak.Myers'sviewisveryhardtostateclearlyandbriefly,buthisremarksonp.291ofthe secondvolumegivethegistofit.Heregardedtherespectivehallucinationsofeachmemberofthegroupasall generatedbyaconceptioninadistantmind,being "diffusedfroma'radiantpoint'orphantasmogenetic,focus,correspondingwiththatregionofspace wherethedistantagentconceiveshimselftobeexercisinghissupernormalperception." BothofthemrejectedwhatMyerscalled"thegrossconceptionofamolecularmetaorganism." NeitherGurney'snorMyers'sviewshavemetwithuniversalacceptanceamongpsychicalresearchers,andother hypotheseshavebeenputforward.MentionshouldbemadeofProfessorHornellHart'spaper,"SixTheories aboutApparitions,"inSPRProc .50.Heargues(p.228)that"Apparitionsandtheiraccessoriesaresemi substantial"ashavingseveralcharacteristicswhichhelists,oneofthembeingthat"theyareoftenseen collectivelybytwoormorepersonsatthesametime". Itisnotsurprisingthatopinionsamongwellinformedstudentsshoulddiffer,owingtothescarcityofcollective caseswhicharenotwhollyillusory,i.e.,duesolelytomisinterpretationofactual,normalpersonsandthings, andowingalsotothevariedconditionsinwhichexperiencesoccur.Arethepercipientstwo,orasmallgroup,or acrowd?Wastheapparitionobservedindoors,outofdoors,inapublicplace?Underwhatconditionsof visibility?Howsoonaftertheexperiencewasitdescribedtopersonswhohadnotthemselvessharedit?Didall thepercipientsdescribetheirshareinitindependently?Whatwastheiremotionalstateatthetime? Whenconsideringtheobjectivityorsemiobjectivityofcollectiveapparitionsitisfirstofallnecessarytoset asidethepureillusions.AmongtheseIwouldincludetwocuesthathavereceivedwidepublicityinourtime,the Versailles"Adventure"andtheBorleyNun. IntheVersaillescasethebeliefthattwoEnglishladiesinAugust1901sawthegroundsandbuildingsofthe PetitTrianonastheywereatthetimeoftheFrenchRevolutionandtheremetandconversedwithseveral personsofthatperiodisbasedonaconfusionbetweenthefirstreportsoftheirexperienceswhichtheyeach wroteinNovemberofthatyear,andsecondaccountswhichtheywroteoutatsomeuncertaindatebetween 1902and1906afterconsultationwitheachother.Theoriginalsofthislaterversiontheydestroyedin1906after makingfaircopies.Theearlierversionisconsistentwiththepersonsandscenesdescribedbeingsuchas anyoneelsemighthaveseenin1901bynormaleyesightthesecondisnot.Itisconsiderablyexpandedand alteredsoastoformapictureinconsistentwiththenormalcontemporaryscene.Inthefirsteditionofthebook thesecondversionisprintedasifitwerethefirst,anditistheonlyoneprintedinmostofthelatereditions.For

    amoredetailedcriticismoftheevidenceIwouldrefertomyarticleinSPRJournalXXXV,178,andTheGhosts ofVersailles ,1957,byLucilleIremonger.Attemptshavebeenmadetofitthedescriptionsofpersonsandplaces inthefirstversion,theonlyoneworthconsidering,toactualpersonsoftheRevolutionaryperiod,givingthose wordsawidesense,andtobuildingseitherexistingsomefewyearsbeforetheRevolutionorplanned.The essentialthinghoweverwouldbetoshowthatthedescriptionsinthefirstversionaredefinitelyinconsistentwith whatavisitortoVersaillesinanordinarystateofconsciousnesswouldhaveseen.Fromthisanglethese attemptsseemtomequiteinconclusive. BorleyRectorywasbuiltin1863.Inconsequenceofseveralillusoryorhallucinatoryincidentsabeliefgrewupin theneighbourhoodthatitwashauntedbyanun.Onesummereveningin1900fourdaughtersofthehouse thoughtthattheyhadseenthenuninthegarden.Theirgoodfaithisabovesuspicion,butunfortunatelythey madenowrittenrecordofwhattheyhadseen.Theearliestwrittenorprintedaccountsareofthestatements theymadeverballytootherpeoplein1928,andtheseaccounts,asreportedbythepersonswhoreceivedthem, donotagreeonthecrucialpointastohowfartheeveningwasadvancedorhowmuchlighttherewastoseethe figureby. Until1929Borleyhadnotbeenthesceneofanypsychicoccurrenceofanindubitablyphysicalkind,butfrom thenonthereisnolackofostensiblyparanormalphenomenathatwerecertainlyphysical.Theonlydoubtis whetheranyweregenuine.ThefactthatthereneverwasanunneryanywherenearBorley,andthatthereforeit wasimprobablethatanylivingnunhadanyconnectionwiththeplace,hasnotpreventedthewildestconjectures astothesupposednun'sidentityandfate.TheastoundingstructureoffantasyandfraudconnectedwithBorley isdescribedinProc .51. Itisamisfortunethattherearesofewcollectivecasesthatarebothveridicalandwellauthenticated,asmuch mightbelearntfromthem.Thecasenowtobementionedisofthetantalisingclassalltoofrequentinpsychical research,inwhichexceptionalfeaturesarepresentthatmightbeusefulcluestoproblemsstillobscure,ifonly theevidencewerealittlebetter.In1863Mr.WilmotsailedfromLiverpoolforNewYorkinashipwhichinmid Atlanticranintoaheavygalelastingseveraldays.Hehadalowerberthinastateroom,theupperberthof whichwasoccupiedbyMr.Tait.Onenight,whenthestormwasbeginningtoabatetowardmorning,hedreamed thathiswife,thenintheUnitedStates,cametothedoorofhisstateroom,cladinhernightdress.Sheseemed todiscoverthathewasnottheonlyoccupantoftheroom,hesitatedalittle,thencametohisside,stooped downandkissedhimand,aftercaressinghimforafewmoments,quietlywithdrew.Onhiswaking,Taitleant overandsaid"You'reaprettyfellowtohavealadycomeandvisityouinthisway,"andonbeingpressedforan explanation,relatedwhathehadseenwhilewideawakeinhisberth.ItexactlycorrespondedwithWilmot's dream.ThefollowingmorningTait,thinkingthatpossiblythevisitorwasWilmot'ssister,apassengeronthe sameship,askedherwhethershehadbeentoseeherbrotherduringthenight.Onhersaying"No",hesaidhe hadseensomewomaninwhite,whowentuptoherbrother. ThedayafterlandingWilmotjoinedhiswife.Almostherfirstquestionwas"Didyoureceiveavisitfrommea weekagoTuesday?"(i.e.,thenightofWilmot'sdream).Askedtoexplain,shesaidthat,beinganxiousastoher husband'ssafetyowingtothereportedlossofanothervessel,shehadlainawakethatnightforalongtime thinkingofhim.Aboutfouro'clockinthemorningitseemedtoherthatshewentouttoseekhim,crossinga wideandstormysea,toablacksteamshipupwhosesideshewent.Shedescendedtoastateroominthe stem,sawamanintheupperberthlookingrightather,wasforamomentafraidtogoin,butsoonwentupto thesideofherhusband'sberth,bentdown,kissedandembracedhimandthenwentaway.Herdescriptionof theship,thepositionofthestateroomandthearrangementoftheberthsinitwascorrect. Itisaseriousweaknessthatnowrittenaccountofthecasewasmadeformorethantwentyyears,bywhich timeTaitwasdead.HispartintheincidentrestsonWilmot'sstatement,supportedbythatofhissister,when shewasquestionedaboutitin189o.Thecaseseemstomeevidentiallygoodenoughtowarrantconsideration, eventhoughanytheoreticalinterpretationofitcanonlybeputforwardtentatively. AsbetweenMr.andMrs.Wilmotthecaseisveridicalbecause,asMrs.Sidgwickputsit(Proc .VII,45),"Each perceivedtheotherinthesituationinwhichtheothersupposedhimselforherselftobe".AsbetweenWilmot andTaititwascollective,butasonewasawakeandtheotherasleepthenationthatboth"saw"Mrs.Wilmot becauseshewaspresentinsomequasimaterialformisruledout.Theexperienceisthereforeofthe"mental" orderand,sincemorethanonepercipientisinvolved,telepathic.Itimplies,however,amorecomplexconception oftelepathythantheoldoneofsinglewaythoughttransferencefromoneagenttoonepercipient. Ingeneralthechancethatnormalpersonshavebeenmistakenforparanormalisincreasediftheexperiencehas occurredoutofdoors,especiallyifithasoccurredinapublicplace,astreetorapark,whereitisimpossibleto

    besurewhowasormighthavebeenpresentintheflesh.Uncertaintyisstillfurtherincreasedifthepercipients aremembersofacrowdwhocannot,allofthem,bequestionedastojustwhattheirexperiencewas,orhowfar collectiveperceptionwasspreadbythecriesorgesturesofthosefirstaffected. Perhapsinthediscussionsthathavetakenplaceonthesecasestoosharpadistinctionhasbeenmade betweencollectiveillusionandcollectivehallucination. inthenight,imaginingsomefear Howeasyisabushsupposedabear. Oneseestheroughdarkshapeinone'spath.Partofitprojects:theheaddoubtless.Achillwindblows.The outlinewavers:thebeastmustbebristlingwithanger.Sofarallisjustillusionduetomisinterpretationof somethingactuallyseen.Supposehoweverthatgrowlsarethenheardproceedingfromtheimaginarybear,there beinginfactnosuchnoise.Theillusionhasnowdevelopedadjunctsthataxehallucinatory. TheFatimavisions,seeninPortugalin1917,arebynowsowellknownastomakeafullaccountofthemhere superfluous.Therewere,itwillberemembered,visionsoftheVirgin,repeatedatfixedintervalsandculminating inOctoberofthatyearinanexperiencesharedbyseveralthousandspectators.ThevisionsoftheVirgin,being supernatural,andthedevotionalfeelingsinspiredbythem,liealtogetheroutsidetheprovinceofpsychical research.Thereishoweveranincidentformingpartoftheculminatingexperiencewhichcanbediscussedasa propersubjectforordinaryphysicalandpsychologicalenquiry. Itconcernsthemotions,orapparentmotions,ofanaturalobject,namelythesun.Thisappearedtosweepround theskyincircles,andtoapproachtheearth.AsFatherMartindalesaysinhisbook,TheMessageofFatima, "Noonesupposesthatthesunwasphysicallydislodgedfromitsplaceinthesolarsystem".Astronomersdid notobserveanydisturbancescorrespondingtothedescriptionsofmembersofthecrowd,andhadthose descriptionsbeenevenapproximatelytrue,thatwouldhavebeentheendoflifeonthisplanet.Itwasnaturally impracticabletoobtainaccountsfrommorethanafeweyewitnessesandthesedidnotexactlytally,butthe behaviourofthecrowdshowedthattherewasawidespreadsenseofhavingobservedsomethingintheskyquite outsidethehabitualcourseofthings. Theexperience,thatpartofitwhichrelatestotheapparentmotionsofthesun,cannotbeconsideredeitheras pureillusionorpurehallucination.Itwasanillusion,becauseanactualobject,thesun,wasinvolved,butits apparentmovementswentfarbeyondmeremisinterpretationofactuality.Thatpointmaybeacademic,butitis apointofimportance,whicheverviewbetaken,thatcollectivemisperceptionevenonamassivescaleisno guaranteeofphysicalobjectivity. Oftheother,psychological,typeofobjectivitydescribedatthebeginningofthischapter,agoodexampleisthe experienceoftwoEnglishwomentakingaholidayontheFrenchcoastnearDieppewhoon4thAugust1951, between4and7a.m.,heardthenoiseofcries,gunfireanddivebombingoutatsea.Bothpercipientshadread newspaperaccountsoftheactualDiepperaidof1942,butneitherhadlookedupthehistoryofitinconnection withtheirvisittotheFrenchcoast.Thesoundsheardbythepercipientsextendedoverthehourswhensimilar soundswouldhavebeenheardonthecoastduringtheactualraid,andthevariationsinsoundcorrespondedto someextentwiththedifferentstagesoftheattack.TheaccountofthecaseinSPRJournal(Vol.36,607618) byMr.G.W.Lambert,anexperiencedofficialoftheWarOfficeandPresidentoftheSociety19551958,and Mrs.Gay,printsinparallelcolumnsthetimesatwhichthepercipientsheardthedifferentnoises,andthetimes ofthestagesoftheattackasrecordedinofficialdocumentsandbypresscorrespondents. Theauthorspointoutthattheexperiencecannotbeexplainedasduetomisinterpretationofactualnoises "heardoff"butthat "itwould...berashtoassumethatthesoundsheardwereasortof'soundtrack'repetitionofthe soundsoftheRaid.Thevariouskindsofsoundheard,gunfire,divebombing,planes,arifleshot, shoutsandcries,areallappropriate,butthereisnotenoughdetailedinformationastowhenthe severalkindsofsoundfirstoccurredtoenableonetojudgewhethertheyare'phasedin' correctly....Bothasregardsformandcontentwethinktheexperiencemustberatedagenuine psiphenomenon,ofwhichlittleornothingwasderivedfrompreviousnormallyacquired knowledge." Thereisnothingintheexperiencetosuggestthatitwastheresultofpostmortemactivitybyanyperson.

    "Iterative"casesfallintothreegroups:(a)Thoserelatingtosomerecogniseddeadperson(b)thosewherethe mainphenomenaconsistofapparitions,butnotofanyrecognisedpersonaclassincludingmostcasesthatare called"haunts"(c)thoseinwhichthemainphenomenaareobjectivelyphysical,i.e.,"Poltergeist"cases. Agoodexampleofgroup(a)istobefoundinProc .XXXIII,pp.167176.CaptainBowyerBoweroftheR.F.C. wasshotdownandkilledontheWesternFrontsoonafterdawnonthe19thMarch1917.Newsthathewas missingwasreceivedbyhismotheronthe23rd.Inthelatepartofthemorningofthe19thhissister,thenin India,wasnursingherbabywhensheturnedroundandsawherbrother.Shesupposedhehadbeenpostedto India,andsaid"Fancycomingouthere".Sheturnedtoembracehim,buthehadgone.Untilafewweeksbefore hisdeathhehadbeenforseveralmonthsinEnglandandhissisterhadnotheardthathehadreturnedto France. BeforeshereceivedtheWarOfficetelegramannouncingthathewasmissinghismotherreceivedaletterfrom anothersistersayingthatherlittledaughterthenunderthreeyearsoldhadtoldherthatheruncle,towhomshe wasdevoted,wasdownstairs,andpersistedinthisstatementwhentoldhewasinFrance.Thesisterbelieved thistohavehappenedabout9.15onthemorningofthe19th,butowingtotheletterhavingbeendestroyedthere isnofullconfirmationofthedateorhour. Ontheafternoonofthe19th,anoldfriendofthemother's,whohadnotcorrespondedwithherforquiteeighteen months,hada"certainandawfulfeeling"thatCaptainBowyerBowerhadbeenkilled,andwrotetohismother expressingheranxiety. Afterhisdeathhadbecomeknowntwootherincidentsoccurred,bothtowardstheendof1917,thoughtheexact datescannotbefixed.Inonehismother,whohadasuddensensationof"mostunnaturalcoldness",sawallhis face,exceptthechin,graduallyemergeinayellowbluerayoflight.Intheotherhisfiance,afterhearingsome raps,wenttosleepandthenwokeuptoseehimonthebedbesideher.Hislipsmovedinawhisper.Shetried totouchhimandhedisappeared. Ofthisstrikingseriesofincidentsthefirstisaverygoodexampleofacrisisapparitionatthetimeofdeath,and thesecondandthirdmaywithlessassurancehealsoclassedasveridicaldeathcoincidences.Thefourthand fifthincidentsarenotveridicalasbothpercipientsknewofthedeath,buthaveelementswhichmayperhaps havebeenphysicallyobjective,thecoldfeltbythemother,andtherapsheardbythefiance:shehad"asked himtoraptwiceifhewasevergoingtoshowhimself"toher,andtworapscame,followedbysleepandavision whichshewascertainwasnotadream.Coldisreportedaspartofmanypsychicexperiences,butitisnot demonstrablyobjective.Thoseofuswholiveinoldhousesoftenhearrapsofnaturalorigin,buttherapsthe fianceheardcameinanswertoherrequest,andseemnottohavebeencasualorpurposeless.Thathowever doesnotsettlethequestionwhethertheywereobjective,apointonwhichsheseemsherselftohavehadsome doubtwhenshewritesofthewholeexperience,"Icertainlydidnotdreamit,orimagineit,butofcourseitmay besomethingtodowithmybrain". Leavingforlaterconsiderationthehauntsandpoltergeists,inwhichthereislittleevidencefortheagencyofan identifiableperson,Iwillturntocaseswhereevidencetothateffectisstronger,andhasbeenclaimedto suggestcontinuedactivityafterdeath.InPhantasmsoftheLivingtheauthorsregardedasdeathcoincidences casesoccurringwithintwelvehoursbeforeorafterthedeath.Forthepurposeofestimatingwhethersuchcases couldbeexplainedbychanceitwasnecessarytofixadefinitetimelimit.Twentyfourhourswasconvenientfor thispurpose,andtheresultsofexperimentsinthoughttransferencesuggestedthattwelvehourswasaboutthe limitforwhichatelepathicimpressionmightremainlatentinthepercipient'ssubconscious.Butmemoriesmay remainlatentformanyyears,andthereseemsnoreasonwhyashorterperiodoflatencyshouldbedefinitely fixedfortelepathicimpressions.Merelapseoftimesincethedeathisthereforeaveryinsecurereasonfor distinguishingbetweenphantasmsofthelivingandphantasmsofthedead.Iftheexperienceconveystothe percipientnoknowledgehedidnotalreadypossess,itmustreckonasoneoftheverynumerousclassforwhich noparanormalexplanationisneeded.Ifknowledgeisconveyedofthingsnotnormallyknowntohimbut occurringduringtheagent'slife,itcanbeconsideredacaseoflatenttelepathy,butthisexplanationbecomes lessandlessprobablewiththelapseoftime.Iftheknowledgeconveyedisofthingsunknowntothepercipient buthappeningaftertheagent'sdeath,theargumentfortheagent'ssurvivalandcontinuedactivityisstronger. Nothoweverconclusive,unlesstheeventslieoutsidenotonlythepercipient'snormalknowledgebutsuch paranormalknowledgeashemayhaveacquirede.g.bytelepathyfromsomelivingperson.Thislastisa difficultywhichconstantlybesetstheseekerforevidenceofsurvival.Itwillbemorefullydiscussedlaterinthe book,inrelationto"communications"receivedthroughmediums.Thepossibilityoftelepathyfromtheliving detractsfromthevalueasevidenceforsurvivalofsomeoftheinstancesofapparitionswhichhaveoftenbeen

    quoted. ThereisforexampletheAmericancase(Proc .VI,17)inwhichaman,whoin1876wasattendingtohis businesscorrespondenceinbroaddaylight,sawstandingbyhimthefigureofhissister,whohaddiedin1867. Thefigureineveryrespectresembledthesisterwhenliving,exceptthattherewasabrightredlineorscratchon therighthandsideoftheface.Hehurriedhomeandtoldhisfather,whowasinclinedtoridiculehimatfirst.He alsotoldhismother,whonearlyfaintedawayandonrecoveringsaidthathehadindeedseenhissister,asno livingmortalbutherselfwasawareofthatscratchwhichshehadaccidentallymadewhileattendingtothebody afterdeath,whenshehadobliteratedthetracesofitwithpowder.Thisisaninterestingcasebutoflittlevaluein provingtheagencyofthedead,ratherthantelepathyfromtheliving.Thescratchwasknowntothemother,a possibleoriginforatelepathicimpression.Oneitherhypothesisitiscuriousthatthereshouldhavebeenalapse ofnineyearsbetweenthedeathandtheexperience. FromthisweaknessatanyratetheChaffinWillCaseappearstobefree.Itakeapersonalinterestinit,asI prepareditforpublicationinSPRProceedings (Vol.XXXVI,pp.517524).JamesChaffin,afarmerinNorth Carolina,diedin1921astheresultofafall,leavingawidowandfoursons.In1905hemadeawillleavinghis wholepropertytohisthirdson,Marshall,whoprovedthewill,andhimselfdiedaboutayearlater,leavinga widowandason,aminor.InJune1925thesecondson,James,begantohavevividdreamsofhisfather appearingathisbedsideandspeaking.Thisvisionmayhavebeena"borderland"experienceoccurringbetween sleepandwaking.Itwasmorerealisticthanpuredreamsusuallyare,butinanexperienceasinformativeasthis thedistinctionisoflittleimportance. ThefigurewasdressedinablackovercoatwhichJameshadoftenseenhisfatherwearing. "Hetookholdofhisovercoatthiswayandpulleditbackandsaid,'Youwillfindmywillinmy overcoatpocket,'andthendisappeared." Jameswenttohiselderbrother'shouseandfoundthecoat,andinsidetheinnerpocket,whichwassewnup,a rollofpaperwiththewords"Readthe27thChapterofGenesisinmydaddie'soldBible".Jamesfoundtheold Bibleinadrawerinhismother'shouseandinthepresenceofwitnessesfoundbetweentwofoldedpageson whichthe27thChapterofGenesiswasprintedanotherwill,dated16thJanuary1919,wherebytheTestator "Afterreadingthe27thChapterofGenesis",inwhichthesupplantingofEsaubyJacobisrelated,dividedhis propertyequallybetween.hisfoursons,andadded,"YouallmusttakecareofyourMammy". Thesecondwill,thoughunattestedbywitnesses,wasvalidbythelawoftheStateandwasadmittedtoprobate inDecember1925,Marshall'swidow,whohadatfirstcontestedit,withdrawingheroppositiononbeingshown theactualpaper.BeforeprobatehowevertheTestatorappearedagaintohisson,James,saying:"Whereismy oldwill?"andshowing"considerabletemper". Thisexperience,whetherdream,apparition,orborderlandcase,hasafullercontentandismoreimpressivethan mostapparitions,ifwecanbecertainthatwehaveallthefacts.Itdetractsfromtheforceofanarrativeof supposedlyparanormaleventsifanypartofitwhichisnotparanormalisimprobable.InthiscasetheTestator's actionastohissecondwillduringhislifeseemshardtoexplain.Thesecondwillwasapparentlyintendedtoset lightwhatheregardedastheinjusticeofthefirst,buthetookthetroubletomakearrangementslikelytoprevent thesecondwilleverbeingeffective,apaperinasewnupcoatpocket,anunattestedwillinanoldBiblenotin ordinaryuseunless,whichhecanhardlyhaveforeseen,hewereabletorevealthewill'sexistenceand whereaboutsbyappearancesafterhisdeath. OntheotherhanditishardtobelievethatthewholestorywasaputupjobbetweentheTestator'swidow,the threesurvivingsonsandthewidowofthesonwhodied,thelastnamedhavinganinterestopposedtothe provisionsofthesecondwill.TheAmericanlawyer,withwhomIexchangedseveralletters,saidthattoanyone whoknewcountryfolkinthatareatherewouldbenothingincredibleintheactionoftheTestatorduringhislife, orofhisfamilyafterhisdeath,andonthatassurancethecasewaspublished. Ifthecaseisacceptedasgenuine,itisprobablythebestcaseofanapparition(orrealisticdream,orborderland case)providingevidenceofactivityafterdeath,bythepurposivenessoftherepeatedappearancesandthe detailedinformationconveyedastomattersoutsidethepercipient'snormalknowledge.Butthepurposewasa limitedone,putintoeffectwithinafewmonthsofthefirstappearance,andthoughtheexperiencemaybe regardedasa"vehicle"bywhichtheTestatorcommunicated,ithasmuchlessclaimtobeconsidereda manifestationofcompletepersonalitythanthephenomenaoftrancemediumshipandautomaticwriting discussedlaterinthisbook.

    Chapter5:HauntsandPoltergeists
    W.H.Salter NOTHINGINtherealmofthe"psychic"or"occult"arousessomuchpopularinterestasHaunted Houses.IhavebeentoldthatenterprisingtravelagenciesinAmericaholdoutasoneoftheprincipalattractions ofavisittotheUnitedKingdomtheprospectofseeingourhistoricghosts.Ifanyofourvisitorshavecomehere withthisintention,theyarelikelytobedisappointed,andtofindthatneitherthefrequencynortheaccessibility ofourghostsisasgreatastheyhadexpected.Infacttheirowncontinenthasproducedexamplesnotinferior, inNovaScotiainthepast,andmorerecentlyonLongIsland. HauntedHousesaremuchmorenumerousinfictionthaninfact,andmorethrillingtoo.Idonotnumberamong themhouseswherethehusbandhavinghadastomachacheinthenight,orthewifehavingmislaidthe saucepanorfindingachimneysmoke,promptlycallsintheaidofthenearestjournalist,tobefollowed, accordingtotheirinclinations,eitherbyoneofthelocalclergyoramediumfromaneighbouringtown.Thisisan imaginarypsychicincident,buteachitemofitcouldbeparalleledfrommyown,anddoubtlessmanyother investigators'experience. Notallcasesreportedareonthefaceofthemastrivialasthis.Somesuggestthemostluridpossibilitieswhich howeverfadeawayonexamination.Thepsychicalresearchercannothoweveraffordtothrowintohiswaste paperbasketallthereportsinlettersornewspapercuttingsthatcometohim,asthereisanoffchancethat everynowandthensomethingmaybehappeningthatwillrepayhisattention,providedsomeknowledgeable personisonthespotbeforethepitchishopelesslyqueered. Therearetwomaintypesofoccurrenceinahouseorotherlocality,thatarenotclearlydistinguishedinthe publicmind.Thefirstisofrecurrentphantasms,visual,auditoryortactile,notdifferentapartfromtheir recurrencefromthosediscussedinthetwoprecedingchapters,noneoftheexperiencesbeingdemonstrably objectiveintheordinarymaterialsense.Thesecondisofnoises,breakagesanddisplacementsofobjects,and thelike,oftenrecurrentand,whereveratestispossible,foundtobemateriallyobjective.Rarelythetwotypes overlap,phantasmsofthekindsmentionedbeingobservedinconnectionwithmateriallyobjectivephenomena. Occurrencesofthefirsttypeareknownas"haunts",ofthesecondas"poltergeists". Amongcasesofhauntsinwhichnodemonstrablyphysicalphenomenaarereported,noneisofgreaterinterest thanthe"Morton"case,socalledfromthefictitiousnameunderwhichthefamilyconcernedpreferredtobe known.ItoccurredinCheltenhamandwasinvestigatedbyMyers,whoknewthattownwell.Heinterviewedthe headofthefamilyduringtheperiodofthemanifestationsand,afewyearslater,hequestionedseveralofthe percipients.InthePrefatoryNotetoMissMorton'sreportofthecaseinSPRProc .VIIIhewrites: "Inthiscaseitisobservablethatthephenomenaasseenorheardbyallthewitnesseswerevery uniformincharactereveninthenumerousinstanceswheretherehadbeennoprevious communicationbetweenthepercipients.Ihavefoundnodiscrepancyintheindependent testimonies,whencollected" except,headds,theinabilityorunwillingnessofanoldgentleman,aneighbour,torememberanincidentsix yearsoldofwhichthereisawrittenrecordmadeshortlyafteritsoccurrence. Thehousewasbuiltabout1860,andtheMortonfamilymovedinattheendofApril1882.Thefirstmanifestation tookplacetowardstheendofJuneinthesameyear,whenadaughter,MissR.C.Morton,thenaged19,saw anapparition.ShewastheprincipalpercipientinthecaseandpreparedthereportprintedinSPRProceedings tenyearslater.Theapparitionwasofatallladydressedinblack,theimpressionbeingofwidow'sweeds.By thelightofacandleMissMortonsawherstandingattheheadofastaircase.Thefigurebegantodescendthe stairs,butatthispointMissMorton'scandleburntout.Inthenexttwoyearsshesawthefigureagainabout halfadozentimes,andonthe29thJanuary1884shespoketoittwice,butthefiguredisappearedwithout makingreply.Shealsoheardlightfootsteps.Someofherexperiencessherecordedatthetimeinletterstoa friend,whicharequotedinthereport.Twoothersistersandabrother,atthetimeaboyof7or8,eachsawthe figureseveraltimesintheperiodbetween1883and1887:someoftheappearancesaresaidtohaveoccurredin daylight.Writtenstatementswereobtainedfromthesetwosistersandthebrother,andalsofromtwoservants. Noisesofvariouskindswereheard.

    MissR.C.Mortonmadeseveralattemptstotestthepossiblematerialityoftheapparition.Acamerawaskept inreadinessandsomeexposuresmade.Thesefailed,aswas.onlytobeexpectedinthepoorlightinwhich mostoftheapparitionstookplace.Thincordswerestretchedatvariousheights,acrossthestairsandthefigure wasseentopassthroughthem.WhenMissMortoncorneredthefigureandattemptedtotouchit,itvanished. Thesefactsareallgoodevidencethatthefigurewasnotmadeofourcommonclay,butwouldbeconsistent eitherwiththeastraletherichypothesis,orwiththeviewofapparitionssetoutintheprecedingchapters.Itisa curiousfeatureofthecasethatMissCampbell,thefriendtowhomMissMortonfirstspokeoftheapparition, herselfsawtheapparition"telepathically"assheputsit,onthenightwhenMissMortonfirstspoketothefigure. ShewasatthetimeatherhomeintheNorthofEngland,quiteahundredmilesfromCheltenham.ItwasMiss CampbellwhohadsuggestedtoMissMortonthatsheshouldspeaktothefigureonitsnextappearance,but shecouldnotofcoursehaveknownwhenthiswouldbe.TheonlyreasonforregardingMissCampbell's experienceas"telepathic"wouldbethecorrespondenceindates,which,thoughcurious,isnotconclusive. Theevidenceinthiscase,thoughnotperfect,mustbeclassedasgood.Theprincipalpercipients,whowere membersoftheMortonfamily,wereofgoodeducationandintelligence,andmadeafavourableimpressionon Myerswhenheinterviewedthem.ItwouldhavebeenbetterifothersbesidesMissR.C.Mortonhadmade writtenrecordsatthetime,butevensowemustsupposethattheprintedaccountrepresentsthefactsintheir mainoutlineatleast.Thefiguremostlyappearedanddisappearedindoorsinconditionsthat,inthisandother respects,practicallyruleoutthepossibilitythatalivingpersonwasmistakenforaphantom.Ontheotherhand, theapparitionwasnotveridical.Itconveyednoknowledgetothepercipientswhichtheydidnotalready possess.Itwasnotrecognised.Therewereonlytheflimsiestgroundsforconnectingitwithanyprevious occupantofthehouse.Ifithadappearedtoonepercipientonly,therewouldhavebeennothingtodifferentiateit fromthegeneralrunofapparitionsthat,fornoobviousreason,justhappen. MissCampbell'sexperiencemayperhapshelptowardsfindinganexplanation.Ifitwasnot,asshethought,due totelepathy,itmayhavebeenduetosuggestionaidedbychance.HerownadvicetoMissMortonmighthave stimulatedhertohaveavisualhallucination,andthecorrespondenceindateisnotoutsidetherangeofchance coincidence.AfterMissR.C.Morton'sfirstexperiencehadbecomeknowntoothermembersoftheMorton family,ordinarysuggestionmightinducehallucinationsinthem. Therearealsoafewcasesofrecognisedapparitionsbeingseeninthesamebuildingbymorethanoneperson independentlyandatdifferenttimes.ThusinacaseinvestigatedbytheSPR(JournalXIX,262)aRectorwas seeninhischurchbythecaretakeraboutayearafterhisdeath.Hespoketoher.(Itwillbeunderstoodthatthe thirdpersonalpronoun,"he",isusedwithoutprejudiceinplaceofaclumsyperiphrasissuchas"Thefigure resemblingthelateRector".)AboutfouryearslaterthewifeofthethenRectorsawtheformerRectorinanother partofthesamebuilding.Sheknewhisappearancefromphotographs,butdidnotknowofthecaretaker's experience.Bothappearanceswereindaylight,whichmakesitimprobablethatanactuallivingpersonwas mistakenforanapparitionofadeadman.Butasneitherpercipientreceivedanyinformationtheydidnotalready possess,theexperiencewasnotveridical.Thefactthatthecaretakerboth"saw"and"heard"thevoiceofthe lateRectordoesnothingtoproveherexperienceotherthanhallucinatory,sinceseveralcasesofsimultaneous hallucinationofmorethanonesensewerereportedtotheCensusCommittee. Inthepoltergeistcases,wheretheoccurrencesaremateriallyobjective,threepossiblecauseshavetobe considered:theymayallbeinoperationinasinglecase.Thefirstisnormal,nonhumanagency:animals, especiallyrats,wind,waterpipes,and,asMr.Lamberthasrecentlystressed,pressurebytidalwateror undergroundstreams.Thesecondisparanormalactivity,operativethroughsomepersonwhoisinasortofway amedium.Thethirdisdeceptiveimitationofparanormalactivity,often,butnotalways,byasubnormal adolescent. Astothefirstsortofcause,ithaslongbeenrecognisedthatrats,windandwaterpipescanproducenoisesodd enoughtobaffleahousehold.Mr.Lambertpointsoutthatasubstantialnumberofpoltergeistcaseshavebeen reportedfromplaceswheretheactionoftidalandsubterraneanwaterwouldbelikelytobestrong,especiallyat certaintimesandseasons.Toestablishapoltergeistintheopinionofthehouseholdandneighboursitwouldbe essentialthattheeffectsoftheactionofthewatershouldbenoticeablebythem,buttheactionitselfnot.This wouldlimitthesupposedpsychicphenomenatonoisesofvariouskinds,andsmallbreakagesand displacements. Manyphenomena,however,areonrecordthatcouldnotbeexplainedbydirectactionofwater,eitherbecause theyaretoobigtohavebeensoproducedwithoutthrustingthecauseontheattentionofthehousehold,or becausetheyareofakindthatnogeophysicaldisturbance,largeorsmall,couldhavecaused,thewritingon

    thewallsinBorleyRectory,forinstance.AstosuchcasesMr.Lambertarguesthatgeophysicalcausesstarted noisesorsmallmovementswhichthehouseholdcouldnotexplain,andsotriggeredoffotherphenomenaofa differenttypeoronalargerscale,thedirectagencyforwhichwashuman. Thoughnonhumancausesarebeyonddoubtatworkinsomecases,itisthehumanactivitywhichisthemost important,andthequestioniswhetheritiseverparanormal.Itisgenerallyagreedthatthereisonehuman agent,ormorethanone,whoseremovalfromthescenewouldatoncebefollowedbythecessationofthe disturbances,andfurtherthattheagent,orifthereismorethanone,thenoneoftheagents,isveryfrequently anadolescent,mentallyorphysicallysubnormal,butthatheisoccasionallyasubnormaladult,and occasionallyalsoanadultwhoisneithermentallynorphysicallybelowtheaverage.Istheagencyofanyof themacaseofgenuinemediumship,orisitinvariablydeceptive,whetherconsciouslyorsubconsciously? Wherethepersonisneithermentallynorphysicallysubnormal,thephenomenaareinmyviewalways fraudulent,anddesignedtofurthersomeplan,suchastofrightenanunwantedmemberofthehouseholdinto quitting,or,asinacaseIlookedintosomeyearsago,topreventthepurchaserofahousetakingupresidence andevictingafamilyofsquatters. Thehypothesisthatthephenomenaweresimulatedthroughtheagencyofasubnormaladolescentwasput forwardbyPodmore,oneoftheauthorsofPhantasms ,in1896afteranexaminationofallthepoltergeistcases whichhadthenbeeninvestigatedbytheSPR.Tocallit,ashasoftenbeendone,"thenaughtylittlegirltheory" isnotquitefair,notonlybecausethedisturbancesweresometimesfocusedonboys,and,aslaterresearch showed,onadultstoo,butbecausethewholepointofPodmore'sviewwasthatthestateofmindthatprompted thecausationofthedisturbanceswasdifferentfromthewilfulnaughtinessofahealthychild.Podmoremayhave riddenhishypothesistoohard,butIamsurehewasontherighttrack. Thestrainswhichpubertyplacesonevenahealthychildareimmenselyintensifiedifthechildisnotuptothe markinmindorbody,tubercularperhaps,oracripple,ormentallydefective.Heiscompelledtoforegosomeof thefunthatheseesotherboysandgirlsofhisownageenjoying.Buthecanfindsomecompensationforthisif byalittletrickeryhecanfool,mystify,perhaps,frightenhisparentsandotherseniorsbymakingthembelieve theyhavetodealwithoccult,sinisterforces.Iftheparentsmakeenoughadoabouthisperformanceshemay himselfcometobelievethattheyaregenuineandsinister."Beguninfun,continuedinfraud,andendingin fright,"wasthesummaryofthereportononecase,andmightapplytomanymore. Itisnotnecessarytoworkanyveryreconditepieceofdeceptiontofoolthesortofhouseholdwherethesethings usuallyhappen.Whenpoltergeistsoccur,astheyoccasionallydo,inintelligentfamilies,alittlepsychological knowledgeandincreaseofaffectiontothechildwillprobablyputarapidendtothetrouble. Theword"trickery"mayhethoughttobegthequestion.Isthereneveranythingparanormal?Itisnotpossible to,provethatthereneveris,becauseitisextremelyrareforacriticalobserver,whoknowswhattrickerycan effect,tobepresentwhenthephenomenaareoccurring.Heisluckyifhecangetafirsthandaccountofthem soonaftertheiroccurrencefromaneyewitnesswhomayknowlittleabouttrickerybutisatanyrateintelligent. Informedopinionisnotunanimous,buttheweightofitseemstometobestronglyagainsttheparanormal.One shouldnothowevercallthetrickeryofsubnormaladolescentsoradultsfraud,reservingthatwordforthe conductofpersonswhohavefewerclaimsonoursympathy. Asaninstanceofthecomplexsituationthatmaybefoundinapoltergeistcase,takethedisturbancesina Londonhousewhicharousedgreatinterestaboutthirtyyearsago.Thehousestoodnearthecourseofan undergroundstream,butthisfactanditspossiblesignificancewerenotrealisedatthetime.Thereissome evidencethat,beforedisturbancesbeganinsidethehouse,stoneswerethrownatitfromadjoiningproperty. Threegenerationslivedinthehouse,includingasenilegrandfather,aged85.Thefirstdisturbancesinthehouse consistedofthethrowingofsmall,hardobjects,suchaspotatoesandlumpsofcoal,Thegrandfatherwasa constanttargetforthese.Lateron,largerobjectswerethrownaboutthekitchen,andfurniturewasupsetand smashed.Amongthemembersofthehouseholdwereason,agedforty,whohadhadbrainfeverasachildand stillsufferedfromfrequentheadaches,andhisnephew,fourteen,adelicate,shylookingboywhohadbeen undertreatmentfornervoustrouble.FromthereportofrepresentativesoftheSPRwhopaidseveralvisits,it wouldappearthatbothsonandgrandsonmighthavebeenresponsibleforcausingdisturbances,andthatthe sonmighthavebeenactuatedbyadesiretofrightentheoldmanoutofthehouse.Disturbanceshowever continuedduringtheson'sabsence,andcouldall,intheviewoftheSPRrepresentativeswhokeptthegrandson undercarefulobservation,havebeencausedbythelatter.Nomoredefinitemotiveforhiscausingthemcouldbe foundthanisusuallytraceablewhereanadolescentisthecentreoftroubleofthiskind.Therewasalsoafree lanceinvestigator,whovisitedthehouseatthistime.Duringhisvisitsremarkablethingshappenedwhichthe

    membersofthehouseholdwhowerenotthemselvesundersuspicionattributedtohim. Occasionallyapoltergeistcase,afterthetypicaldisturbances,isreportedasdevelopingapparitions.In poltergeistcaseswhicharefreefromsuspicionofdeliberatedeceptionthereisacharacteristicpsychological situationnotusuallyfoundamongpercipientsofapparitions.Itisthereforedesirabletolookcloselyintothe reportsofapparitionsseeninpoltergeistcases.Who.claimstohaveseenthem?Isitcertainthatwhoeveris causingthedisturbancesisnotalsofabricatingreportsofapparitionsinordertoarousestillgreaterinterestand tomakethewholeaffairconformmorecloselytothepopularnotionofhowaghostshouldbehave? AtBorleytheprocesswasreversed.Acasewhichhadrunforseveraldecades,withapparitions,realor supposed,butnophenomenathat,whethergenuineornot,werecertainlyphysical,suddenlybreaksoutinto physicalphenomenaofvariouskindscontinuedforseveralyearsduringwhichtheoccupantsoftheRectory entirelychange.Boththechangefromapparitiontopoltergeist,andthecontinuanceofthepoltergeist phenomena,notwithstandingchangeofoccupant,aresounlikewhatthepsychicalresearcher'sexperienceof othercaseswouldleadhimtoexpect,astocallforathoroughscrutinyoftheevidence. ThisitreceivedinVol.51ofSPRProceedings inareportbasedonmostcarefulexaminationoftheavailable evidence,writtenandoral,conductedoverseveralyears.IvisitedtheRectoryduringthefirstyearoftheFoyster incumbency,andinterviewedboththeFoysters,andwenttheretwicelateraftertheyhadleft.Ihavenotthe slightestdoubtthatthereportgivesatruepicture,ingeneral,ofthehaunting,andonlyregretthathereandthere thetoneissobiasedastodetractfromtheforceofthecommentary. HenryBullwhobuiltBorleyRectoryin1863livedtheretillhisdeathin1892.Hewassucceededbyhisson, HarryBullwhodiedin1927,butforseveralyears,1911to1920,didnotliveattheRectory,whichwasoccupied byhissisters. ThereputationoftheRectoryforbeinghauntedwasstartedbythevisionsofHenryBull,anotableeccentric. Thereisnoreasontosupposetheywereanythingelsethansubjectivehallucinations.Forthewholeofthetwo Bullincumbenciesandthefirstfewmonthsofthatoftheirsuccessor,theRev.G.E.SmithwhobecameRector in1928,thereputationforhauntingwasincreasedbyrusticcredulity,perhapsalittlemildhoaxing,andthe misinterpretationofordinarysightsandsounds.Onthe10thJune1929ajournalist,invitedbyMr.Smith,visited theRectory,heardmanymarvelsbutsawnone. Twodayslaterallthatwaschangedmostdramatically.Thejournalistreturned,bringingwithhimHarryPrice, wholaterwrotetipthehauntintwobooks.Onthisoccasionthickpanesofglassfellfromaroof,splashingthem bothwithsplinters.Theysawaglasscandlestickhurtlepasttheirheads,pebblescometumblingdownthe stairs,andsoon.Forthisstartlingdevelopmentthereisonlyonereasonableexplanation,namelythatthese occurrencesweredeliberatelyfakedbyHarryPrice.Thissuggestionwillnotappearimprobabletothosewho knowhowlaterhemanipulatedanddistortedotherpeople'sevidenceastoeventsatBorley,orwhohave followedhisconductinothermatters,thecircumstances,forinstance,ofhisexposureofRudiSchneider. InOctober1930theRev.L.A.Foyster,acousinoftheBulls,tookupresidenceattheRectory,accompanied byawifemuchyoungerthanhimself,whosefirstexperiencethiswasoflifeinasmall,remote,Englishvillage. BetweenthenandJanuary1932ostensiblyparanormalphenomenaoccurredingreatnumberandastonishing variety,includingvoices,apparitions,odours,throwingofobjects,overturningoffurniture,and,notleast remarkable,theappearanceofmessagesonwallsandpiecesofpaper.TheRector,acharmingandcultivated man,butnotinconversationshowingmuchsignofworldlywisdom,wroteitalldownwithgreatcare.Thereisno doubtthatsomeatleastofthephenomena,themessagesforexample,werefakedbyMrs.Foyster,whose apparentmotivewastoworryherhusbandintogivinguptheliving.Whenitbecameclearthathewouldnotdo this,thephenomenaceased. ItisunnecessarytodescribetheeventsaftertheFoystershadleft,whileHarryPricewastenantoftheRectory, whichhadceasedtobeusedassuch.Theplacewasinvadedweekbyweekbygroupswhosehungerfor sensationmuchexceeded,inmostcases,theircompetenceasinvestigators.Norisitworthwhiletowastetime overreportsofstilllaterevents.Populusvultdecipi,andthroughHarryPrice,Mrs.Foysterandsomeorgansof thePressithadatBorleyitsheart'sdesire. Somuchdoubtattachestoapparitionsreportedasseeninconnectionwithoccurrencesofthepoltergeisttype thatitisuselesstospeculatewhethertheyaretoanydegreematerial.Noqualificationastomaterialityis neededregardingthecandlestickshurtlingthroughtheair,thefurnitureknockedabout,andsoon.Theseare materialintheordinarysenseoftheword,andsointroducesomethingwhichhadnoplaceintheaccountsof

    apparitionsdiscussedinChapterIII.Theirnaturalaffinityiswiththephysicalphenomenaofthesanceroom, withwhichthenextchapterwilldeal.BeforehoweverleavingthesubjectofapparitionsIwillsummarisemy viewsonthemandontheirbearingontheproblemofsurvival. Thenumberofreportedinstancesofapparitionsandofcognateauditoryandtactileexperiencesisenormous. (ForthesakeofbrevityIwillmentiononlythevisualexperiences,theapparitions:theyarethemostnumerous andwhatissaidaboutthemappliesingeneraltoexperiencesoftheothertwokinds.)Severalvolumeswouldbe requiredtosetthemalloutwithanadequatecommentontheevidential,psychologicalandotherpointseachof themraises.Forthepurposeofdeducinggeneralprinciplestheycanbeconsideredasconformingtovarious types.Thisbecomesmuchclearerifoneinsistsonahighevidentialstandard,therulesgoverningwhichare suchascommonsensedictates:theyhavebeenstatedshortlyinChapterIII.Rigidadherencetothemisin practiceacounselofperfection,butcaseswhichdeviatesubstantiallyshouldbediscardedintheformulationof principles. Ihaveattemptedabovetodescribethemaintypes,givingexampleswithcomments,andhavealsosetoutand commentedonseveralcasesthathavecometoberegardedas"leadingcases"onthevarioustopicsunder discussion.Itwilldoubtlessbesuggestedthatifothercastshadbeenchosenadifferentmoralcouldhavebeen extractedfromthem,butthatthecaseschosenareleadingcasesfewwillprobablydeny.Forinformationasto thefrequencyorscarcityofdifferenttypesofapparitionreliancehasbeenplacedonthethreecollections alreadyspecified,PhantasmsoftheLiving(1886),theCensusReport(Proc .X,1894)andMrs.Sidgwick'spaper inProc .XXXIII(1923).Sincethatdatetherehasbeenagreatreductioninthenumberofexperiencesofallkinds reported.Thisprobablyimpliesareductioninthenumberofactualexperiences,andnotmerelyofreportsof them,andaCensusonthesamescaletodaymightverylikelyshowfiguresdifferentfromthoseof1894.There ishowevernoreasontosupposethattherelativeproportionsofthevarioustypeswoulddiffersomuchasto affectthepropositionssetoutbelow: (1)Itisnotuncommonforsaneandhealthypeopletoseeapparitionswhilebelievingthemselvestobefully awake. (2)Nothingisatpresentknownastowhethersaneandhealthypersonswhentheyseeapparitionsofthekind describedinthisandtheprecedingchaptersareinanyparticularphysiologicalcondition.Hallucinations,butof aquitedifferentkind,maybeproducedbydisease,alcohol,drugsortheelectricalstimulationofthebrain. (3)Nothingisknownastothepsychologicalconditionsinwhichthegreatmajorityofsuchapparitionsareseen. (4)Asmallproportionofsuchapparitionsshowacorrespondencewithexternaleventsofwhichthepercipient hadnonormalknowledgeandwhichhecouldnotinferbyanynormalreasoning.Thesearecalled"veridical". (5)Statisticsappliedtotheparticularclassofveridicalapparitionsknownas"deathcoincidental",i.e.,occurring withintwelvehoursbeforeorafterthedeathofthepersonseen,showthatthecorrespondenceisnotdueto chance,andaccordinglythatitrequiressomeparanormalexplanation. (6)Veridicalapparitionsarethereforeobjective,ascorrespondinginsomewaytothingsexternaltothe percipient'snormalknowledgeorinference,buttheyarenotobjectiveinthesenseofconsistingofanything physicalormaterialintheusualmeaningofthosewords:theydonot,e.g.,leaveanymaterialaftereffects. (7)Mosthumanapparitionsareclothed.Thisismorereasonablyexplainedbysupposingthatthewhole apparition,includingtheclothes,occursasamentalimagethanontheviewthatitisaquasimaterialreplicaof apersonoffleshandblood. (8)Realisticveridicalapparitionsstandatoneendofaseriesofexperiencesattheotherendofwhichstand veridicalintuitionsdevoidofsensoryimagery.Anyexplanationmusthesuchaswillexplainthewholeseriesof experiencesrealistic,semirealisticandsymbolicvisions,"borderland"cases,dreamsandintuitions.Between apparitionsandeventsofadefinitelyphysicalormaterialkindthereisnocontinuousseries,noconnectinglink suchasasupposedintermediatesemimaterialsubstance:seesubclause17post. (9)Theseriesofveridicalexperiencesthatrangesfromapparitionstointuitionscanmostsatisfactorilybe explainedifallofthemareconsideredaspresentationstothepercipient'sconsciousmindoftelepathic impulsesreceivedbyhissubconsciousfromanotherpersonwhoisconnectedwithitvisuallyorinsomeother way,accordingtothetypeofexperience.Itisconvenienttocallthispersonthe"agent"withoutnecessarily implyingthathisactivityistelepathic.Presentationmaybebyarealistic,semirealisticorsymbolic

    hallucination(astowhichseep.31above),orbecompletelywithoutexternalisation. (10)Thebasicideaoftelepathyistransfusionofmindsratherthantransmissionofideas,asismostclearly shownin"reciprocal"experiences. (11)Atelepathicimpulsemayremainlatentinthepercipient'ssubconscious,certainlyforashorttime,butitis notknownforhowlong.Veridicalapparitionsseenshortlyafterdeathmaythereforebetheresultoftelepathic impulsesfromtheagentwhilealive,andthesameispossible,thoughlessprobable,whenaconsiderabletime haselapsed.Thelengthoftimebetweendeathandexperiencecannotbetakenasbyitselfdecisiveforor againstactivitybyalivingagent. (12)Ifanapparitionconveystothepercipientinformationastomattersoutsidehisnormalknowledgeor inferenceorthatofanyotherpersonfromwhomhecanbereasonablysupposedtohavederivedittelepathically, andifthemattersinquestionrelatetothingsthathavehappenedsincetheagent'sdeath,thatisevidenceofthe agent'ssurvivalinthewayandtotheextentthatinformationobtainedunderthelikeconditionsthrougha mediumwouldbe,butnototherwise.Casesofthistypeare,asmighthavebeenexpected,rare. (13)Apparitionsofthesameagentmaybeseenatdifferenttimesbydifferentpercipients,andtheconditionsin whichthishappensvary.Ifthelaterpercipientshavenoknowledgeoftheearlierpercipients'experiences,and especiallyiftheapparitionsareseen,asina"haunt",inthesameplace,thereissomethingoddrequiring explanation.Thesecaseshoweverareseldomveridicalorsuggestiveoftheactivityofarecognisabledead agent,orofanymaterialorquasimaterialbeing. (14)Poltergeistsareanaltogetherdifferenttypeofoccurrencenotwithstandingoccasionalreportsofapparitions beingconnectedwithtypicalpoltergeistdisturbances. (15)Ifthereareanywellestablishedcasesofveridicalapparitionsbeingseensimultaneouslybymorethanone percipient,theyaresorareastomakeitimpossibleusefullytoargueastotheircause.Inconsideringreportsof themlargeallowancemustbemadeformisinterpretationofnaturalpersonsandobjects,andfortheinfluenceof thewordsoractionsofonepercipientontheothers. (16)Collectivepercipienceisnoguaranteeofthelocalpresenceofanypersonorobjectconsistingofanykindof matter(orquasimatter)forwhichthereissatisfactoryevidence. (17)Apartfromapparitions,whosenatureisnowunderdiscussion,theevidencefortheexistenceofa substanceintermediatebetweenmindandmatterderivesfromvarioustypesof"physicalphenomena"andthe statementsofthemediumsthroughwhomtheseareproduced.InthenextchapterIgivereasonsforconsidering thisevidenceunsatisfactory. (18)Themainbearingofapparitionsontheproblemofsurvivalisindirect.Asexamplesoftelepathyandpartof theevidenceforthatfacultytheyhelptoshowthatmentalprocessesarenotentirelyconditionedbybodily ones,andmightthereforecontinueinoperationafterthedeathofthebody.Afewcasesinwhichinformationas toeventsaftertheagent'sdeathisparanormallyconveyedbyanapparitionaddsupporttothesurvival hypothesis,butitisthenatureoftheinformationandnotitsconveyancebyanapparitionthatmatters. Otherwiseapparitionstellneitherfornoragainstsurvival. Iputforwardthesepropositionsasmypersonalopinion,withoutclaimingthatsufficientproofofallofthemhas beenadduced.Ofmanyoftheminthepresentstateofourknowledgecompleteproof,ordisproof,isnot possible.Theyseemtomehowevertobesuchasareindicatedbyabroadviewofthebestavailablematerial.

    Chapter6:Materialisations
    W.H.Salter THERESTofthisbookwilldealwithmediumship,thatistherealorsupposedpossessionandexercise byspeciallyendowedpersonsofparanormalfacultiesnotsharedbymankindatlarge.Thepsychologyof mediumshipiscuriousandanattemptwillbemadeinthetwochaptersfollowingthistoillustrateitbyparallels tobefoundamongpersonswhocouldnotbeclassedasmediums.ThisIhavepostponedinordertointroduce herethediscussionofaparticularvarietyofmediumship,thatproductiveofthe"physicalphenomena"ofthe sanceroom,andsotoroundofftheconsiderationoftheevidenceputforwardtosupporttheconceptionof survivalinaquasimaterialform. Thevarietyof"physical"phenomenawhichhaveatonetimeoranotherbeenreportedisenormous.Ifthe occurrencesreportedhavebeenaccuratelydescribed,theyallofthemimplysomedeviationfromthefamiliar courseofeventsinthephysicalworldandfromthesocalled"laws"generallyacceptedasgoverningthatworld. Infewotherrespectsdotheseheterogeneousoccurrencesappeartobeconnectedwitheachother.One commoncharacteristicisindeedthedifficultywhichtheinvestigatorencountersinattemptingtoexamineanyof themunderconditionsthatwillexcludesourcesoferrorshownbyexperiencetobeprevalentinthisbranchof psychicalresearch.Anotherfeaturecommontothe"physical"phenomenaofmediumshipanddifferentiating themfromthe"mental"phenomenaofpsychicalresearch,isthattheybelongtothesanceroomandnottothe worldofeverydaylife.Theordinarycitizenhasnocausetobesurprisedifhehasaveridicaldream,orevenifhe seesacrisisapparitionofthekinddiscussedinChapterIII.Butthat,whenheisbyhimselfinhissittingroom, thetableshouldberaisedoffthefloorwithouthistouchingit,orthathishairbrushshouldsuddenlyandinvisibly betransportedfromhisbedroom,isaveryremotecontingency.Thesethingsarereportedtohappenin poltergeistcasesandinthepsychologicalsettingtypicalofthem.Apartfromsuchcases,itisinthesance roomtheyaretobesought. Thestudyofthemishighlytechnical,andofexpertsaliveatanyonetimetherehasneverbeenmorethana handfulwhoseopinionastothegenuinenessorotherwiseofwhathappensina"physical"sancedeservesto carryweight.Withoutanyclaimtobeanexpertmyself,Ihavehadthegoodfortunetoknowsomewhowere, andtohavediscussedthepositionwiththem,aswell,ofcourseastohavereadmanyreportsofvarying degreesofvalue. Manyformsof"physical"phenomenaarenotinthemselvessuggestiveoftheactivityofanentitythathas survivedbodilydeath:raps,themovementofobjectswithoutapparentmuscularormechanicalforce,"apports", andsoon.Theyaresometimesclaimedatsancestobetheworkofspirits,butitisforthespiritfirsttoprove hisexistenceand,ifneedbe,hisidentity,andifhecandothatbyotherevidence,suchasaconvincing communication,"physical"phenomenaofthesekindsare,asevidence,superfluous. Otherkindshowever,iftheycanheshowntobegenuinelyparanormal,suggestbytheirnaturetheactivityofa survivingentityhaving,orbeingcapableofassuming,amaterialorquasimaterialform.Sucharematerialised phantoms,whetherofthewholefigureorofpart,capableofbeingseenandoccasionallytouchedbythesitters impressionsinwaxofpartsofthebody"spirit"photographs,andtheproductionofavoiceclaimingtocome fromthemouthneitherofthemediumnorofanyotherlivingpersonpresent.Allthesephenomenaseem intendedtosuggestthatsomebeingotherthanthepersonspresentinthefleshwaspresentinthesanceroom inaformsufficientlymaterialtobeseen,touchedorphotographed,ortomakeimpressionsonwaxsimilarto thoseabodyoffleshandbloodwouldmake,ortoemitsoundssuchascomefromthemouthsoflivingpersons. Thisprimafaciesuggestionisoftensupportedbystatementsmadethroughthemediumthata"spirit"hasbeen presentandhascausedtheoccurrenceofthephenomena,which,itisclaimed,mayprovenotonlyhis presencebuthisidentity. Ifboththe"physical"phenomenaandthestatementsregardingthemmadethroughthemediumareaccepted asgenuine,thereisanendofthematter:thesurvivalofspiritsinamaterialorquasimaterialformhasbeen proved.Therehavehoweverbeenmanypsychicalresearchers,includingtheeminentFrenchphysiologist, CharlesRichet,whohavebelievedinthegenuinenessof"Physical"phenomenaofthiskindwhilerejectingthe viewthatspiritswereconcernedintheirproduction.Theydevelopedasanalternativeexplanationthehypothesis of"ideoplasmy",thatistosay,theviewthatmaterialisationsareproducedfromthemedium'senergyanda substance("ectoplasm")suppliedbyhimwiththeassistanceperhapsofthesitters,andthattheytakeformin

    accordancewiththethoughtsofthosepresent.Thebasicquestionisthegenuinenessofthephysical phenomenaunlessthiscanbeansweredintheaffirmative,itisidletodiscusstherivalmeritsofthespiritistic andideoplasmichypotheses. Ofallfullformmaterialisations,themostfamousarethoseobservedbyWilliamCrookesinhissittingswith FlorenceCook,whoin1872attheageofsixteenbegangivingsittingsatwhicha"spiritform",knownas"Katie King",materialised.AtasittingheldinDecember1873atthehouseofthemedium'sfatherthemediumsatina curtainedrecess,clothedinablackdressandbootsandtiedtothechairbysealedtape.Afigureinwhite drapery("KatieKing")cameoutoftherecessintotheroomandmovedaboutundertheobservationofthe sitters.Oneofthese,aMr.Volkman,afterwatchingthefigureforaboutfortyminutescametotheconclusion thatitwasthemediumdisguised,sprangupandseizedfirstamuscularwristandthenasubstantialwaist. OthersittersthenrescuedthefigureoutofVolkman'sgrasp.Itretreatedintotherecess,whichwasopenedafter aboutfiveminutestorevealthemediumintheblackdressandbootsandtiedtothechairbythesealedtape. Nowhitedraperywasfound.Volkmanpublishedanaccountofthesitting,andsostimulatedCrookes,whohad notbeenpresentatthissitting,topublishhisaccountsofsittingswithFlorenceCookin1872and1874atwhich hehadbeenpresenttheywillbefoundintheissuesofTheSpiritualistfor6thFebruary,3rdApriland5thJune, 1874.Crookeswishedtorebutanysuggestionthatthemediumhadmasqueradedasthespiritbyshowingthat tohisownobservationbothhadbeenpresentatthesametime. OnoneoccasionKatieKingatasittinginCrookes'shouseinvitedhimbehindthecurtain.Hefollowedwithin "threeseconds",ashesays,andsawthemediuminherblackdresslyinganthesofa,butinthemeanwhile KatieKinghadvanished.Onotheroccasions,alsoinhisownhouse,severalofthesitterssawfiguresthey believedtobethemediumandKatieKingtogetherunderstrongelectriclight.Crookesreports: "Wedidnotontheseoccasionsactuallyseethefaceofthemedium,becauseoftheshawl,but wesawherhandsandfeet.wesawhermoveuneasilyundertheinfluenceoftheintenselight,and weheardhermoanoccasionally." NoneofthephotographstakenatthesittingsatCrookes'shouseshowedthetwofaces. Butthereweretwosittingsheldatthemedium'ssuggestioninherownhome,whentwofigureswerecertainly seentogether,thefacesofbothbeingvisible.Othermembersofthemedium'sfamilywerepresent,andthe medium'sbedroomservedmacabinet.Onthe29thMarch1874KatieKingwalkedabouttheroomwherethe sittingwasheldfornearlytwohours,talkingtothosepresent,andseveraltimestakingCrookes'sarm.Shethen saidshethoughtshecouldshowherselfandthemediumtogether,andinvitedCrookestocomeintothecabinet withaphosphoruslamphehadbrought.Hewentinandbythelightofhislampsawthemediumcrouchingon thefloor,dressedinblackvelvetshedidnotmovewhenhetookherhandandheldthelightclosetoherface. "RaisingthelampIlookedaroundandsawKatiestandingclosebehindMissCook...Three separatetimesdidIcarefullyexamineMissCookcrouchingbeforemetohesurethatthehandI heldwasthatofalivingwoman,andthreeseparatetimesdidIturnthelamptoKatieandexamine herwithstead.fastscrutinyuntilIhadnodoubtwhateverofherobjectivereality." Atalatersitting(21stMay,1874),alsoatthemedium'shouse,Crookeswaspresentbehindthecurtainand sawandheardKatieandthemediumsaygoodbyetoeachother. ThegenuinenessoftheKatieKingphenomenahasfromthentillnowbeenamatterofacutecontroversy.Onthe affirmativesidethemainargumentisthatCrookeswasahighlyintelligentman,andaneminentscientistfacts ofcoursealtogetherbeyonddisputeandthathehasgivencleartestimonyinacasewheremistakewas incredible.Intelligenceishighlyrelevanteminenceinscienceoranyotherwalkoflifeisnot,unless accompaniedbylongexperienceandobjectiveexaminationofpsychicalphenomena.Crookesbeganhis interestinspiritualisminastateofstrongemotion,owingtothelossofabrothertowhomhewasdeeply attached.Hisfirstsittings,asdescribedinhisbiographybyFournierd'Albe,showacompletedisregardof commonsenseprecautionsagainstfraud.By1874howeverhehadhadconsiderableexperienceofmediums, includingD.D.Home,themostfamousofall"physical"mediums.Crookeshimselfreinforcedthecasefor genuinenessbyanargumentwhichcannotinthelightoflaterinvestigationsofpoltergeistcasesbeallowed muchweight,namelythatFlorenceCookwastooyoungtocarryoutafraudofthecomplexitythat,iffraudthere were,mustbeassumed.Alikeargumentisraisedoverandoveragainwhenpoltergeistsarediscussedbutlong experiencehasshownboththeinclinationandtheabilityofadolescentstogulltheirseniors. Onthenegativesidethemainargumentswere:firstthatthecontrolconditionsthroughoutwereinadequate

    secondthatatthesittingsatCrookes'shousehedidnotseebothfiguresatthesametime,beingperhaps deceivedintothinkingthatclotheswhichthemediumhadremovedinordertoimpersonatethespiritstillhadthe medium'sbodyinsidethemthirdly,thatitissignificantthattheonlytwoinstanceswhenitisbeyonddoubtthat themediumandKatieKingwerepresentatthesametime,bothhavingformssufficientlymaterialtohetouched, weresittingsheldatthemedium'shouse,whereamemberofherfamilymightpossiblyhaveimpersonatedKatie King.TheinadequacyoftheControlatthesetwosittingswaspointedoutbyseveralspiritualistswhenCrookes publishedhisaccountofthem.ImpersonationofKatiesometimesbythemediumandsometimesbyanother womanwouldaccountfordifference.,inKatie'sappearance,height,etc.,noticedatvarioustimesbyCrookes himself. InlateryearsFlorenceCookconfessedboastedmightbethebetterwordthatKatieKingwasadeliberate fraudonherpart.These"confessions"werenever,Ibelieve,madepublicduringCrookes'slifeandhehadno opportunityofansweringthem.Theyarethereforeinnowayevidenceagainsthim,andiftherewerenoother groundsforsuspectingthegenuinenessofKatieKingtheycouldhedisregarded.Inacasehoweverof phenomenaforwhichnocloseparallelcouldbecited,andinwhichstrongdoubtsofgenuinenesshavebeen raisedbytheVolkmansittingandtheunsatisfactoryconditionsatCrookes'sownsittings,themedium's confessionsseemtomeratherdamaging.Itistobenotedthat,whethergenuineornot,themanifestationswere thoroughlymaterial.CrookesnotednothingquasimaterialaboutKatie'sarmwhenshetookhis,anymorethan Volkmandidwhenhegraspedamuscularwristandsubstantialwaist. SincethedaysofFlorenceCookothermediumshavebeenfamousfortheappearanceatsittingswiththemof fullyformedphantoms.Abouttwoofthemostfamous,MartheBeraud,laterknownasEvaC.,andHelen Duncan,somethingwillnowbesaid. AttheendofthenineteenthcenturytherewerelivinginAlgiersaFrenchGeneral,Noel,andhiswife.Theywere holdingregularsanceattheirvilla,andin1900theyinvitedaM.Marsault,alawyerbyprofessionandafriend oftheirsonMaurice,toattendthem.Atthisstagenomaterialisationshadtakenplace.Laterin1900Maurice wenttotheCongoonbusinessanddiedtherein1904.Hehad,beforeleavingAlgiers,becomeengagedtoa youngFrenchwomannamedMartheBeraud.OnlearningofhisdeathMarsault,betweenwhomandMaurice's parentssomecoldnesshaddevelopedowingtohisscepticalattitudetothesances,paidthemavisitof condolence.Marsaultlearntthatthemannerofthesanceshadchanged.AspiritnamedBienBoa,who claimedtohavebeenanArabChief,hadforsometimebeengivingcommunicationswithoutshowinghimself.He wasnowappearinginafullymaterialisedform,andanotherspirit,callingherselfBergoliaandclaimingtobehis sister,wasmaterialisingtoo.BergoliahadchattedwithMme.Noel,drunkteaandeatensweetswithher.Mine. NoelsaidthatMauricealsohadappearedandkissedher.SheinvitedMarsaultandafriendtosupperanda sance. AfterthesupperMarthe,findingherselfaloneforafewminuteswithMarsaultandhisfriend,isreportedby Marsaultassaying,"Doyouwanttohavesomefun?YouknowBergoliaisallhumbugmysisterandIwillgive yousomefun".ShehadpreviouslytoldMarsaultthatallthematerialisationswerefalse,butthisavowal astoundedhim.TheywerethenjoinedbyMarthe'stwoyoungersisters.AtthesancewhichfollowedMarthe, hesays,impersonatedBergoliainaverytransparentway. ThenextstagewasthatCharlesRichet,thedistinguishedphysiologist,visitedAlgiers,hadsittingsattheNoel's houseandwitnessedthematerialisedBienBoa.HisaccountmaybereadinhisThirtyYearsofPsychical Research(translatedfromtheFrench,1923)whereaphotographofBienBoaisreproduced(p.507).He acceptedthematerialisationasagenuinecaseofideoplasmy.Hisfavourablereportwasfirstpublishedin1905 andwasreadwithamazementbyMarsault,whowroteconfidentiallytoRichetsayinghefearedRichethadbeen deceived.InJanuary,1906,MarsaultwenttoseeMartheandherfather,meetingalsohermotherandtwo sisters.HereportsMartheassayingthatshehadbeenledintomediumshipbyMme.Noel'simportunities,and that,beingalreadyestablishedasamaterialisingmedium,shecouldnotavoidgivingRichetsittingsthewhole thingwasasham,butherpartinithadbeenpassive.Marsaultpublishedhisaccountoftheaffairin1906. Richetstucktohisownopinion,dismissingMarsaultinaverycavalierfashion.ForthispartofMarthe'scareer seeSPRProceedings Vol.XXVII,333369. In1908MarthecametoParisandin1909begantogivesittingstoaprivatecircletowhichDr.vonSchrenck Notzing,awellknownGermandoctorandpsychicalresearcher,wasintroduced.SchrenckNotzinginhisfirst reportsofhercalledher"EvaW'withoutanyhintthatshewasthesamepersonasthefamousMartheBeraud. SobegananewphaseofMarthe'smediumship,inwhichthecontrolconditionswerenotsonegligibleasinthe timeofBergolia,andthephenomenawereofaratherdifferentorder.Nofullformphantomswereseenbutfrom variouspartsofthebodythereseemedtocomemassesofccsubstance"ofvarioussizes,coloursand

    consistencies,sometimesshapeless,sometimesroughlysuggestiveofhandsetc.,andsometimesintheform offlatorflattishobjectsonwhichappearedfaceseitherroughlydrawnorinamorefinishedstyle,like photographs.OfthefacesproducedatherParissittings,someboreacuriousresemblancetophotographsof notablepersonspublishedintheFrenchPress.Thusattwosittingsin1913sheproducedfacesbearinga likeness,whichnotwithstandingdifferencesofdetailwasunmistakable,tophotographsofPresidentWilsonand PresidentPoincarewhichhadbeenpublishedin1912intheMiroir.Thefaceswerenotjustcutoutfromthe MiroirbutlooklikeroughcopiesoftheMiroirphotographsdeliberatelyalteredindetail,e.g.PresidentWilsonis givenamoustache. Afewfacesofboththeroughandthemorefinishedtypeswereproducedattheseriesoffortysittingsgivento anSPRCommitteein1920.MywifewaspresentatsomeofthesesittingsandIwasthenotetakeratasitting describedinthereport(SPRProc .Vol.XXXII)as"averyremarkableone"(p.275).BeforethesittingsEvaC. wasstrippedandsewnintoastockingettecostume,andduringthesittingbothherhandswerecontrolledby experiencedsitters.TheinvestigatingCommitteeconsideredthattheprecautionstakenweresufficientto preventtheextrusionofpseudoparanormalobjectsevenifthemediumhadsucceededinintroducingtheminto thesanceroom,concealedinsomeway.Theonlycontinuouslightingduringthemedium'strancewasadim redlightonthenotetaker'sdesk.WhenEvaC.announcedtheproductionof"substance",itwasinspectedby anelectrictorchturnedonforthatpurpose,andonoccasionflashlightphotographsweretaken. Dr.Dingwall,whowasamemberoftheCommittee,contributedtothereportasectioninwhichhediscussed thepossibilityoffraudinrelationbothtoEvaC'ssittingsontheContinentandtotheLondonseries.Hesays (pp.328,329): "SpeakingpurelyformyselfIcannotsaythatIaltogetherrelyupontheobservationsofher continentalinvestigators,whilstthesittingsinEnglandweretoofewandthephenomenatoo insignificanttoenableanysatisfactoryconclusiontobearrivedat." TheCommitteeasawholemuchregrettedthattheywereunabletocomedefinitelyeithertopositiveornegative conclusions. AglanceatthephotographofBienBoainRichet'sbook,oratthephotographsofthefacesproducedatthe sittingswithEvaC.issufficienttoexplainwhymanybelieversinthegenuinenessofhermediumshiprejecteda spiritisticviewofit.ThesoulsofthedepartedmayconceivablyinhabitformsresemblingBienBoaifsowemust enduretheprospectwithfortitude,regrettingonlythatwehavebeenmisledbythepoetsandartiststoexpect somethingdifferent.ButdoesnotBienBoalooklikeaclumsyattempt,whetherideoplasmicorfraudulent,to imitatetheestablishedtraditionalconceptofaspirit?Tomeitmostcertainlydoes.Muchthesamecriticism appliestothefacesoftheEvaC.sittings.Someofthemarepleasantenoughastwodimensionaldrawings:but whytwodimensionaliftheyarespirits?Again,noteventheadditionofamoustachecouldconvertthePresident Wilsonof1913intoaplausiblevisitorfromanotherworld. Mrs.HelenDuncanwasthemostfamousmaterialisingmediumofourtimeinthiscountry.Shewastwice prosecutedforfraudandconvicted,firstin1933andthenin1944,butuntilherdeathin1956enjoyedthe confidenceofmanybelievers.ItisnothoweverthequestionwhetheranyofherphenomenaweregenuinewhichI wishtodiscuss,butthatotherquestionwhetherhermaterialisationsinthemselvessuggestaspiritualorigin.I wouldrefer,forexample,tothephotographfacingp.37ofSPRProc .XLVIII,reproducedfromabookofHarry Price.Howmuchspiritualityisthereinthat? Anothertypeofoccurrencesometimesclaimedtodemonstratethepresenceinthesanceroom.ofa materialisedorpartlymaterialisedspiritistheproductionofwaxmouldsofpartsofthehumanbody,especially hands.Atasittingforthissortofphenomenontheprocedureadoptedissomewhatasfollows:Themedium's handsarecontrolledbysittersabowlofwaxwarmenoughtotakeamouldfromisplacednearbyoutofthe bowlistakenamould,say,ofahand,whichwhenthewaxhashardenedshowsallthecharacteristiccontours andmarkingsofahumanhand.Itisclaimedthatthemouldcouldnothavebeenformedroundahandofflesh andbloodthatwassubsequentlywithdrawn,astheapertureatthewristwastoosmalltopermitwithdrawalof anythingbutanectoplasmichand. SuchmouldswereobtainedwiththePolishmediumKluskiin1921atsittingsconductedbyCharlesRichetand Dr.Geley,headoftheInstitutMetapsychiqueatParis.Theywereconvincedthatthemouldswereproduced paranormallyby"Ideoplasmy".Intheabsenceofprecautionsitwouldbepossibleforatrickstertoproduce bogusmouldsintwowaysatleast:(1)byahandorhandsdippedinthewaxandwithdrawnwhenthewax cooled,providedthetricksterhad,assomepeoplehave,anexceptionalpowerofcompressingthewristandthe

    bonesatthebaseofthethumb(2)bytheintroductionintothesanceroomofmouldsmadebeforethesance byordinarytechnicalprocesses,RichetandGeleyclaimedthattheyhadtakenadequateprecautionsagainst boththeseformsoftrickery.Thequestioniswhetherthisclaimwasjustified,particularlyasregardsthesecond method.Theprecautiontakenwastomixwiththewaxusedforthesanceachemicalsubstanceeasily traceableafterthesance,andthissubstancewasinfactfoundinthemouldsproduced.Thiswouldseemtobe anadequatesafeguard,provideditwerecertainthatthemediumhadnoknowledgebeforethesittingthatthe chemicalwastoheused.Mediumsdosometimesgettoknowbeforeasanceofsupposedlysecretmethods ofcontrol.InsittingsheldundertheauspicesoftheSPR.Ishouldbeconfidentthatnosuchriskwouldbe incurred,butIhavelessconfidencethatnothingofthekindcouldhavehappenedintheInstitutofthosedays. In1926Mrs.Crandon("Margery"),thewifeofawellknownsurgeonofBoston,Mass.,wasalreadyknownasa mediumwhosephenomena,producedinthepresenceofmanyexperiencedinvestigators,wereofastonishing varietyandhadarousedviolentcontroversyastotheirgenuineness.Inthatyeartherewasanewdevelopment. Largenumbersofprintsofthumbs,fingersandpalmsofthehandwereproduced,paranormallyasitwas claimed,thethumbandfingerprintsbeingsaidtocorrespondtothoseofherdeadbrother,Walter.Somethumb printsofthesamepatternwerealsoproducedatsittingsgivenbyherinEngland. AtoneoftheEnglishsittingsin1929afingerprintofthemedium'swasfoundonapieceofwaxusedatthe sitting,andthenaturalinferencewasthatatacriticalmomentMargery'shandswerenotcontrolledsoefficiently astopreventherbeingabletomanipulatethewax.In1932howeveramoredamagingdiscoverywasmade.A Mr.Dudley,oneofherstrongestsupporters,whohadsupervisedmanyofherAmericansittingsandpublished reportsonthem,wascollectingfortherecordsoftheAmericanSocietyforPsychicalResearchdigitalprintsof allthesitterswhohadeverbeenpresentataMargerysittingwhenthumborfingerprintswereproduced.Among herearliersitterswasadentist,calledinthereports"Kerwin".Oncomparisonofthesitters'printswiththe numerousimpressionsfromMargerysittingswhichwereaccessibletohim,Dudleyfoundtohissurprisethatthe impressionofKerwin'srightthumbcorrespondedineveryinstancewithimpressionsofrightthumbsproducedat thesittings,andthathisleftthumbprintscorrespondedtosomeleftthumbimpressionsfromthesittings.Itwas laterfoundthatthecorrespondenceextendedtothethumbprintsobtainedatMargery'ssittingsinEngland. AsaresultoffurtherenquiriesMr.Dudleyascertainedthatveryshortlybeforethefirstsittingatwhich"Walter" printshadbeenproduced,MargeryhadpaidKerwinaprofessionalvisitwhenhehadexplainedtoherhowdental waxwasused,andhadgivenherimpressionsonwaxofbothhisthumbs,togetherwithsparepiecesofwax. Mr.Dudley'sviewastothecorrespondencebetweenthe"Walter"impressionsandtheKerwinprintswas confirmedbyProfessorCummins,anAmericanauthorityon"dermatoglyphics",whomadereportsonthe AmericanprintstotheAmericanSociety,andontheEnglishprintstotheSPR.(seeSPRProc .Vol.XLIIIpp. 1523).BeforeDudley'sdiscoverymanyofMargery'ssupportershadacceptedwithoutquestionasupposed correspondencebetweenhersanceroom.printsandprintsmadeonarazorbyherbrothershortlybeforehis death.Onexaminationitwasfoundthattheprintsontherazorweretooindistincttoproveanything. Anothertypeofphenomenonwhich,itissometimescontended,provesthesurvivalofspiritsinaquasimaterial formis"Spiritphotography".Amateurphotographersofunquestionablebonafides sometimesgetresultswhich puzzlethemandleadthemtowonderwhethertheymaynot,withoutanyintentiontodoso,havephotographed somemanifestationofthespiritworld.TheirprintsareoftenforwardedtotheSPRforanopinion.Itshouldbe notedherethat,whilethecauseoftheunexpectedresultcanoftenbedetectedfromthepositiveprint,the originalnegativefilmorplateismuchmoreinformativeand,ifitisafilm,negativesofthecompleterollaremore informativestill.Sometimesthepuzzlingresultsareduetoanaccidentalintrusionoflight,producingblursor fogswhichalivelyimaginationcanconvertintopersonsorthingsofanotherworld.Sometimesafreakoflight andshademakesarealobjectpresentwithinthephotographicfieldatree,perhaps,orapartofabuilding looklikeafigure,althoughthephotographerknowsthatnosuchfigurewasvisuallypresent. Theeffectsofaccidentaldoubleexposureinproducing"ghosts"arenowsowellknownthatfewamateursbother theSPRwithexamples.Theappearanceofseveralghostlyfiguresbeforethealtarofacathedralinanamateur photographthatattractedmuchpublicityrecentlywaspronouncedbyexpertstobeduepartlytodouble exposureandpartlytoaslightmovementofthecamerawhileoneoftheexposureswasbeingmade. Ifamateurphotographs,mostlysnapshots,wereallthathadtobeconsidered,therewouldhenoneedtobring "spiritphotography"intoadiscussionofsurvival.Buttherehavebeenmediumswhospecialisedinthe productionof"spiritphotographs",andthisformofmediumshiphasaverylonghistory,stretchingbackto1862. InthatyearMumlerinAmericabegantoproducephotographsonwhichtheformsof"spirits"appeared.Inthe followingyearitwasdiscoveredthatintwoofhisphotographsthe"spirit"wasapersonstillliving.Tenyears lateranEnglishpractitioner,Hudson,wasactive,andarousedaviolentcontroversyinSpiritualistcircles.His

    supportersadmittedthatsomeofhisphotoslookedasiftherehadbeendoubleexposure.The"spirits"however assuredthemthattheappearanceofdoubleexposuredidnotindicatefraud,butwasduetotherefractionof raysoflightpassingthroughthemixedaurasofthe"spirits"andthesitters.In1875aFrenchman,Buguet,on beingprosecutedbyhisGovernment,confessedtothefraudulentproductionof"spirit"photosbydouble exposure.Fortheearlyhistoryof"spirit"photographyseeSPRProc .VII,268289. Theseinauspiciousepisodeshavenotpreventedtherevivalof"spiritphotography"fromtimetotime.The techniqueusedhasbeencarefullystudied,andsomefraudulentmethodshavebeendiscovered.Thetwo principalarethese:(1)Forthevirginplate,whichthesitterisintendedtobelieveisbeingexposed,thereis substitutedaplateonwhicha"spirit"imagehasalreadybeenimpressed.Whentheplateisdeveloped,there appearbothanormalportraitofthesitter,andan"extra",asitiscalled,thatistosay,somethingwhichwould nothavebeenvisibleintheordinarywaytoapersonstandingwherethecamerastood.Thedevelopednegative willoftenshowsignsofthedoubleexposure.Forinstancetherebateofthedarkslidemakesadistinctline downthemarginoftheplate,andasdarkslidesdonotexactlyfittheplatestheyaretohold,adoubleexposure usuallymeansadoublemarginallinethepresenceontheplateofadoublemarginallineisstrongevidenceof doubleexposure,whichisstrongevidenceoffraud.Inaprinttheedgescanbetrimmedsoastoconcealthis clue. "Extras"areoftenwelldefinedphotographsofheads.Sometimestheheadsaresurroundedby"ectoplasmic clouds"similartowhatcanbeproducedbyplacingsomefluffymaterialincontactwiththeplate.Where substitutionispossible,itisnomysteryif"extras''appear,withorwithout"ectoplasmicclouds",reproducingthe featuresofwellknownpublicmenorwomen.Theoriginalmagazineorbookillustrationfromwhichthe"extra" hasbeencopiedhassometimesbeenidentified,andthegrainofthepaperonwhichtheoriginalwasprinted detected.Iftheidentityofthesitterisknowntothemediumbeforehand,hemaybeabletoobtainforcopying photographstakenduringlifeofsomeofhisdeadfriendsorrelations,though,ofcourse,thisisnotalways possible. Substitutionofplatesmaybemoreclearlydetectedinotherwaysthanbyinferencefromsuchcluesasthe doublemarginalline.Ittakesaveryexpertobserverunderbetterconditionsthanusuallyprevailtoseethe substitutionbeingmade,butwherethesitterbringswithhimmarkedplateswhichhegivesthemedium,andat theendofthesittingishandedaplatecompletewith"extra"butlackingthemark,itisclearthatsubstitution hasinfacttakenplace. (2)Thereishoweveranothertechniquewhichcanbeusedbyamediumwhoknowsthathehastoworkwitha markedplate,butdeterminesnottobedefeatedbythisprecaution.IquotefromareportmadetotheSPRin 1932byMr.FredBarlow,whohadPreviouslybeenastrongsupporterofthegenuinenessof"spirit Photography".Itshouldbeexplainedthatin1922HarryPricehadasittingwithWilliamHope,thebestknown "spirit"photographerofthattime.Pricetookwithhimplatesonwhichthemakershadprintedmarksthat remainedinvisibletillafterdevelopment.Hegotbackaplatewithan"extra"butwithoutanymakers'mark.Mr. Barlowwrites: "SinceMr.Price'sexposureofHope,substitutionseemstohavebecometoorisky,andmostof theresultsnowshowasmallfaceidenticalinkindwithwhatcanbeproducedbyflashlight apparatus.Suchflashlightapparatuscaneasilybepalmedandusedinthedarkroomorpocket withoutfearofdetection...Itconsistsofasmallelectricbulbwithwireswhichareconnectedtoa batteryhiddenabouttheperson.Infrontofthiselectricbulbisplacedasmallpositiveface,andit isonlynecessarytoswitchonthebulbforasecondorsotoprintthepositiveontothesensitive platewhere,ofcourse,itwilldevelopasanegativeimage." MajorRamplingRose,whohadalargebusinessasaphotographicmanufacturer,andcollaboratedwithMr. Barlowinhisresearch,demonstratedtheuseofaflashlampofthiskindatameetingoftheSPR.Headdedthat duringthethirtyyearshehadbeeninthetrade,hisworkhadbeentotrackdowndefectsanddevisemethodsto overcomethem,thathehadtakenphotographsinalmosteverypartoftheworld,andhadhadfouryearsaerial photographicexperienceduringtheFirstWorldWar.Hecontinued: "Idonotremembereverseeingasingleabnormalphotographofallthosewhichhavepassed throughmyhandsthatcouldnotbeexplainedbypurelynaturalmeans." FortheBarlowRamplingRosepaperseeSPRProc .XLI,121138. Whateverthemethodusedbythespiritphotographer,agooddealofrelianceseemstobeplacedonthe

    imaginativepowersofthesitter,whichareatleastequaltothoseshownbyanyamateurphotographerin interpretingblursandfogsonhissnapshots.AsthefamousSpiritualist,StaintonMoses("M.A.Oxon."),wrote in1875: "Somepeoplewouldrecogniseanything.Abroomandasheetarequiteenoughtomakeupa grandmotherforsomewildenthusiastswhogowiththefigureintheireyeandseewhattheywish tosee." Hewasreferringtothematerialisedphantomsofthesanceroom,buthiswordsareequallyappropriatetospirit photographs.Itisnotonlyinthepsychiccontexthoweverthattheproblemoffalserecognitionarises.Thereis, forinstance,thecaseofthatmostsubstantialrevenant,theTichborneClaimant.Somewhohadknownthereal manwellacceptedtheClaimantothersrejectedhim.Bothpartiescannothavebeenright,butastowhichwas wrongtherestilllingersadoubtsufficienttoprovokeanimatedcontroversyinbooksandthePress. Thepresenceof"ectoplasmicclouds"insuchapositionontheplateastoobscurethefeaturesofthe"spirit extra"naturallygreatlyincreasesthechancesoffalserecognition. FinallyreferenceshouldhemadetotheclaimsometimesadvancedbytheControlsofmediums,includingsome whosebonafides isabovesuspicion,thatthevoiceinwhich"communications"aregivencomesnotfromthe medium'sownmouthorvocalchords,butfromsomeotherpartoftheroomwherethesittingisbeingheld,and throughsomeectoplasmicvocalorganismoftheControl.Effortstotestthisclaimwithappropriateapparatusfor locatingsoundshavenotsofarsucceeded.Mostpeople'sjudgmentastothesourceofsoundsisnotoriously fallible,especiallyinthedarkorinpoorlight.FortheweighttobeattachedtothestatementsofControlsabout themselvesseeChapterIX. Asregardsanytypeofpsychicexperienceitisimpossibletoprovethatnogenuineexamplehaseveroccurred. Amediummaycheatwheneverlaxconditionspermittrickeryandyet,apparently,producegenuineresults understrictconditions.EusapiaPalladinoisthemoststrikinginstance.AtCambridgein1895andatother timesandplacesshewascaughtintheact,butatNaplesin1908sheproducedphenomenawhichthehighly competentcommitteewhotheninvestigatedherbelievedtobegenuine:seeSPRProc .Vol.XXIII.And,of course,the,exposureofonemediumisnotevidenceagainstanothermediumproducingsimilarphenomena, althoughitishighlysuspiciousif,inthesecondcase,thereoccurincidentsofakindwhich,inthefirstcase, havebeenfoundconnectedwithfraudulentmethods. FlorenceCook,WilliamHope,MargeryCrandon,whosecaseshavebeendiscussedinthischapter,werethe mostfamousmediumsoftheirdayintheirownlines,andwereacceptedasgenuinebymanysitters.Thereader canformhisownopinionastotheprobabilityorotherwisethatgenuinefullformmaterialisations,genuine "spirit"photographsorgenuinelyparanormalthumbprintswereeverproducedthroughthemediumshipofanyof them,andgenerallywhetherornotphenomenaofthesetypeslendanysupporttobeliefinsurvivalinaquasi materialform. Mediumsusedtocomplainthattheconditionsofcontroltowhichtheywereaskedtosubmitwereunpleasant andirksomesearchofthebodyforconcealedobjects,tyingofhandsandwrists,andsoon,conditionswhich wereimposedtopreventthesimulationofphenomenainsittingsheld,atthemedium'sinsistence,inpoorlight orevencompletedarkness.Whateversubstancetheremayhavebeeninthiscomplainthaslonglostallits relevance.Foryearsnowtheapparatusgenerallyknownasthe"infraredtelescope",whichenablesmovements toheseeninthedark,hasmadeunnecessarythemeasurescomplainedof.Arewardhasbeenofferedfor mediumscapableofproducingphysicalphenomenawiththeinfraredtelescopeasthesolemethodofcontrol. Nomediumhassofarcomeforwardtoclaimthereward.Thisreluctanceconfirmsmeinmyviewthatnoneof thephenomenadiscussedinthisortheprecedingchapterssupportthequasimaterialconceptionofsurvival. Itisnotdifficulttotracethestageswhichhaveledtothesevarioustypesofphenomenonbeingtaken, separatelyortogether,asevidencesupportingthisconception.Firstofalltherearevisualandauditory hallucinationsatoraboutthetimeofthedeathoftheperson"seen"or"heard",orlater.Thesearegenuine experiencesmisinterpreted,verynaturallyinprescientifictimes,ashappeningnotinthepercipient'smind,but insomeexternalregion,andtothatextentasbeingphysicallyobjective,thoughnotassolidaslivingfleshand blood.Thenationofthislimited,quasiphysicalobjectivityisconfirmedbysomeoftheseexperiencesconveying orimplyingknowledgeoffactsnottillthenknowntothepercipient,whichdoesindeedinvolveobjectivityofa differentorder,andbyothersofthembeingcollectiveorrecurrent. Thenextstageisforpopularbelief,withthehelpofthepoetsandstorytellers,toembellishnarrativesof

    subjectiveoccurrenceswithpicturesquedetailsthat,iftrue,wouldmakethewholeexperiencephysically objective:hencethetraditionalghoststory.Allthismayhavebeendoneingoodfaith,evenwhere,asinthe originalversionoftheDonJuanstory,themotiveofedificationisatthebackofit.Thisleadsontopoltergeist trickery,whichonehesitatestostigmatiseasfraudbecauseoftheirresponsiblenatureofthepersonsmost closelyconcerned.Butthebeliefinquasimaterialspirits,originatingandconfirmedinthewaydescribedabove, isoftenshamelesslyexploitedinthesanceroornbydeliberatefraud,tothediscreditofaprofessionnumbering manyhonourablemembers.

    Chapter7:EcstasyandInspiration
    W.H.Salter THEPREVIOUSchapterwasconcernedwiththeparticularformofmediumshipthatproduces materialisationsandother"physical"phenomenasometimessupposedtosupportthetheoryofsurvivalina quasimaterialform.Themediumshipwithwhichtherestofthisbookwillbeconcernedisofadifferentkind, whichforwantofabettertermisoftencalled"trancemediumship".Thepresenceoftranceisnotthecriterion. Manyphenomenaof"physical"mediumshipareprobablyproducedingenuinetrance,whilemany "communications"aregiveninstatesnotfarremovedfromnormalconsciousness:thisisparticularlytrueof automaticwriting.Thephrase"trancemediumship"ishoweverbynowestablishedingeneraluse,andisless misleadingthansuchanalternativeas"clairvoyantmediumship".Thecharacteristicofmediumshipofthiskind isthecommunicationofmessagespurportingtocomefromthesurvivingmindsofpersonsnowdead. Occasionallysuchcommunicationsarecombinedwith"physical"phenomena,butoften,andinthecaseof mediumsofthehigheststandardgenerally,theyarenot.Whethersocombinedornotthecommunications oughttobejudgedontheirownmerits,independentlyoftheevidentialvalue,ifany,ofphysicalphenomena occurringthroughthesamemediumship. Peoplewhoencountermediumshipforthefirsttime,whetheratactualsittingsorthroughprintedreportsof them,oftendoubtlessthinkitaveryqueerbusiness,andfindthemselvesatalosswhethertoregarditwith beliefordisgust.Indiscussingthereforethistypeofmediumshipitmaybehelpfultostartwithasurveyof variousmentalstateswhichmayatfirstsightseemtohavelittleconnectionwitheachotherorwith mediumship.Someofthesestatesarecommonandfamiliar:othersingreaterorlessdegreerare.Theymayor maynotformpartoftheordinaryconsciouslife.Forsome,butnotallofthemaparanormalexplanationseems required. Wemaybeginwithaconditionfamiliartoeveryone,namelysleep.Thatourdreamsareverylargelyshapedby internalconflictsandresistances,astaughtbyFreudandhisfollowers,nobodywhohasexaminedhisown dreamsforanylengthoftimewillbedisposedtodoubt.TheinfluenceoftheFreudianunconsciousisextremely pervasive,butpsychicalresearchhasshowninrelation,forinstance,totelepathy,thatmuchgoesoninthe subconsciouswhichwillnotfitintothecanonicalschemeofFreudianism(seeabove)Freudhimselfwas preparedtoaccepttelepathy,andwouldhavemadehisacceptancepublic,hadhisfollowersallowedhimtodo so.Manysleepershavefoundonwakingthatproblemsthatseemedtotheminsolubleovernighthavesomehow solvedthemselveswithoutanyconsciouseffortontheirpart.Thishowever,althoughitsuggestsparanormal activityduringsleep,doesnotclearlydemonstrateit,norindeeddoesitproveanysubconsciousactivityatall. Possiblyasolutionhadbeenalmostreachedbynormalmentalprocessesbeforesleep,butthefinalstageof graspingithadbeenfrustratedbyfatigueorbyexcessiveconcentrationworkingthrough"thelawofreversed effort",andwithsleeptheobstaclestosuccessmayjusthavevanished. Therearehoweverinstancesinwhichthesleeperdidnotmerelyfindthesolutioncompleteinhisconscious mindonwaking,buthaditpresentedtohiminadreamwiththatmixtureofrealismandsymbolicimagery typicalofdreams.HereisanexamplequotedfromSPRProc .XII,1317.Anarchaeologist,whowasin1893 preparingareportonsomeBabylonianfindsforanAmericanuniversity,waspuzzledbytwosmallpiecesof agatewithfragmentaryinscriptions.Hethoughtthepieceshadoriginallybeenpartoffingerrings,andwhilehe coulddeciphersomeofthewritingononepiecehecouldmakenothingoftheother.InhisdreamaBabylonian priesttookhimintothetreasurehouseofatemple,anddeclaredtohimthatthesetwopieceswerenotfinger rings,buttwosectionsofacylinderwhichhadbeencutintothreeparts,andthatthethirdsectionwouldnothe found.ThefirsttworingshadservedasearringsforthegodNinib."Ifyouwillputthetwotogetheryouwillhave confirmationofmywords."Onthenextdayheputthetwopiecestogether,foundthattheyfittedsoastoform partofacylinder,andthatfromthepreviouslyindecipherableinscriptionshecouldreconstructadedicationto thegodNinib.Asthedreamhadstated,itwasimpossibletomakeacompletecylinderoutofthetwo fragments,andthepieceneededforthiswasneverfound.Alltheinformationrequiredforthissolutionwas alreadypossessedbythearchaeologistbeforehefellasleep.Hisdreammaythereforehavebeennomorethan amechanismforpresentingtohisconsciousmindaconnection,alreadyformedbyhissubconscious,between consciouslyknownfacts.Ifthatviewiscorrect,thepriestinthedreamwouldbehisownsubconscious dramatised.

    Evenmoreimpressivearetheinstancesofimaginativecreationindreams,ofwhichColeridge'sfragmentary KublaKhanisthemostfamousexample.Thelatterpartofthischapterwilltreatofcreativeimagination,butit mayaidtoabetterunderstandingofwhatthepoetshavetosayonthatsubject,ifwenowconsidersome curiouspsychologicalstatesofwhichaccountshavebeengivenbypersonsofmorecommonclay.Thesestates aregenerallyknownas"outofthebody"experiences,adescriptionwhich,howeverclumsy,fairlyexplainsitself. Thereareseveralexamplesonrecord,differinggreatlyastothefullnessoftheexperience,andthenatureofits constituentparts,buthavingthisfeatureincommon,thatalivingpersonfeels,andoftenseemstosee,hisreal selfseparatedforatimefromhisbody,whichhealso"sees",asitwere,fromoutside. ThemostfamouscaseisthatoftheAmericanDr.Wiltse,reportedinSPRProc .VIII,andalsoinHuman Personality,Vol.II.ThefollowingisasummaryofDr.Wiltse'sownaccountofhisexperience.Intheyeas1889 heseemedtohimself,andalsotothedoctorattendinghim,abouttodie.Hesaidgoodbyetohisfamily, composedhislimbs,sankintounconsciousness,andpassedaboutfourhourswithoutpulseorperceptible heartbeat.Hethenreturnedtoastateofconsciousexistencewithinthebodyand"watchedtheinteresting processoftheseparationofsouland"body".His"Ego",tousehisownphrase,graduallydetacheditselffrom onepartofthebodyafteranother,finallyemergingfromthehead"likeasoapbubbleattachedtothebowlofa pipe",whichbrokeloosefromthebodyandfelltothefloor,"whereIslowlyroseandexpandedintothefull statureofaman.Iseemedtobetranslucent,ofabluishcastandperfectlynaked",afactwhichembarrassed himashewasawareofthepresenceoftwoladies.HisEgosomehoworotheracquiredclothes.Lookingatthe couchhehadlefthesawhisbodylyingtherejustashehadComposedit.Onleavingthehousehewalkeda shortwaydownthestreet,andlateralongamountainroad,whichwasblockedbythreeenormousrocks.Then agreatdarkcloud,withboltsoffiredartingthroughit,stoodoverhishead,andhewasawareofapresence whichhecouldnotsee,notseemingtobeaform,butfillingthecloud: "likesomevastintelligence....Thenfromtherightsideandtheleftofthecloudatongueofblack vapourshotforthandrestedlightlyuponeithersideofmyhead,andastheytouchedmethoughts notmyownenteredintomybrain." Thethoughtsweretotheeffectthattherocksweretheboundarybetweentwoworldsoncehepassedthemhe couldnomorereturnintothebodyhecouldnotdosounlesshebelievedhisworkinthebodytohefinished. Aftersomehesitationheattemptedtocrosstheboundary,butasmall,denselyblackcloudmovedtowardshim andheknewhewastobestopped:"...thecloudtouchedmyface,andIknewnomore.Withoutprevious thoughtandwithoutapparenteffortonmypartmyeyesopened."Hesawthecotonwhichhewaslyingand realised"inastonishmentanddisappointment"thathewasinthebody. ArathermorerecentcaseisthatcontributedtotheEdinburghMedicalJournalin1937bySirAucklandGeddes, andreviewedintheSPRJournal,Vol.XXX.Hereagainthepercipientwasadoctor,whowasapparentlydying. Herelatesthatatnostageoftheexperiencewashisconsciousnessdimmed,but: "Isuddenlyrealisedthatmyconsciousnesswasseparatingfromanotherconsciousness,which wasalsome." TheEgoattacheditselftooneconsciousness(A),whileherecognisedtheBpersonality"asbelongingtothe body",showingsignsofbeingacompositeof"consciousnesses"fromdifferentpartsofthebody,andtendingto disintegrate, "whiletheAconsciousness,whichwasnowme,seemedtobealtogetheroutsidemybody,which itcouldsee." Fromasourcehedidnotknow,butwhichhefoundhimselfcallinghis"mentor",hereceivedinformationasto theproblemsofspaceandtime.Butadoctorhastilysummonedmadeaninjectionwhichmadehisheartbeat morestrongly: "IwasdrawnbackandIwasintenselyannoyedbecauseIwassointerested...Icamebackinto thebodyreallyangry...andonceIwasbackalltheclarityofvisionofanythingandeverything disappeared..." InanothercaseaMr."Kenwood",whohadbeensufferinggreatlyfromfatigueandanxietyasaresultoftending hiswifeduringanIllness,rememberedinthemorninganexperiencehehadhadduringthenight.Theceilingand roofseemedtodisappearandheclearlysawastar:

    "MySpiritleftmybodywhichIsawbymywife'sinbed.Iseemedtoresembletheshapeofa flamewithalongsilverthreadattachedtomyearthbody.IenjoyedwhatIcanonlylikentothe PeaceofGodwhichpassethallunderstanding.Ihaveneverenjoyedsuchmentalexhilaration beforeorsince...TheStarcamenearerandinpassingmeassumedthehead,neckandthoraxof myfatherinlaw(deceased).Hetoldmebyimpressingitonmymindthatmywifewouldbeall right.HeshotdownandIturnedtoseehimentermybody..."(afteraperiodwithoutconscious memory)"MymemorycamebackasIwasshootingearthwards.AgainIpassedmyfatherinlaw whoimpressedthethoughtonmymind'Don'tworryabouther,sheisquiteallright'.Iremember thecordgettingveryshort,butIamunabletorecallanythingofthereentryintomybody." Thenextdaythewife'shealthwasgreatlyimproved.ThecaseisreportedintheSPRJournal,Vol.XXXIII. Thistypeofcase,ofwhichotherexamplesareonrecord,promptsthequestion:Havewenotproofhereofan "astralbody",capableofalmostcompletedetachmentfromthe"earthbody"duringlife,capableofmaking contactwith,thoughnotoffullyenteringinto,thespiritualworldbeforedeath,andpresumablythereforecapable ofcontinuedexistenceafterdeathandofcompleteentryintotheworldofthespiritthen?Thereisindeedenough uniformitywithinthisgroupofcasestoshowthattheydescribeagenuineclassofexperienceandarenota randomassortmentofoddities.Commontoalltheinstancesquotedisthesense(a)ofexistenceinanentity notentirelyoutoftouchwithearthlyaffairs,butnotdependentonthe"earthbody",(b)ofthisexistencebeing preferabletoearthlyexistence,sothatintheWiltsecasethereis"disappointment"andintheGeddescase "annoyance"atthereturn,whileMr."Kenwood"had"neverenjoyedsuchmentalexhilarationbeforeorsince"as duringhisexperience,and(c)ofcontactwithsomeintelligenceotherthanthatofthepercipient. Butthedifferencesmustnotbeoverlooked.IntheWiltsecasetheexternalintelligencebecomesalmosta personalDeity,manifestingindarkcloudsandlightning.IntheGeddescasethe"mentor"hardlyemergesfrom abstraction.InMr."Kenwood's"experiencea"star"becomesadeadrelative.Ineachofthethreeinstances thereisstrongelementofsymbolism,andthisvariesfromcasetocasejustasmightbeexpectedifwewereto supposethepresentationtotheconsciousmindofseveralrealbutsubjectiveadventuresofthesubconscious. ManyimportantobservationsoncasesofthiskindaretobefoundinProfessorWhiteman'spaperinProc .50, pp.240274,inwhichheanalysesanumberofexperiencesincludingseveralinwhichhewashimselfthe percipient. Withtheseexamplesofonepartofthepersonalityfeelingitselftobedetachedtemporarilyfromanothermaybe comparedtheexperiencesofmenwhoinsituationsofdifficultyanddangerhavehadthereassuringsensationof thepresenceofaprotectivecompanion.Aninstanceofthis,not,Ithink,previouslypublished,wasthatofaman whoinearlymanhoodrougheditinvariouspartsoftheworld,particularlythebackblocksofAustralia,acountry forwhichhehadagreataffection.LaterhehadajobasengineerinastillundevelopedpartofCanada. Hereachedhiscampthereonewinterafternoonanddecidedtocollecthismail,whichhehadnotreceivedfor severaldays,fromthepostoffice,abouttwomilesdistantthroughthebush.Bythetimehehadcollectedit,and wasstartingback,itwasrapidlygettingdark.Hecouldhearwolveshowlinginthedistance.Heheardfootsteps behindhimandavoicewhichsaid,"Windy,cobber?".Hepressedonandwhenhereachedhisquartersturned roundtoseewhohiscompanionwas,andsawnobody.Thenextmorninghewentcarefullyoverhistrackofthe previousday,andsawonepairoffootprintsinthesnow,hisown,goingandreturning,andnomore.The interestingpointofthisnarrativeisthattheunseencompanionoftheCanadianwildsshouldtalkAustralian slang.Theprotectorwasdoubtlessaprojection,externalisedtohissenseofhearing,ofhappydaysinAustralia, whenthehardshipsmayhavebeensevere,butdidnotincludetheriskofbeingeatenbywolvesinthesnow. Thestory,famousatonetime,of"TheAngelsofMons"wasapiousfictionoriginatinginaparishmagazine.It incorporatedsensationalfeatures,suchastheproductionofpanicamongthehorsesoftheenemycavalry,that arewithoutparallelinwellevidencedcases.Afterlongenquiryonlyonemancouldbetracedwhoclaimedto havebeenaneyewitness,andhisregimentalrecordsshowedthathewasinEnglandatthetime.Butthereare firsthandaccountsfromsoldierswhotookpartinthefamousretreatofwearymenhavingcollectiveillusionsof seeingfriendlytroopscoveringtheirflankswhennosuchtroopswerethere.(SPRJournalXVII,106118). Someofthecharacteristicsoftheseexperienceshavecuriousparallelsintheaccountswhichauthorsand artistshavegivenoftheprocessofimaginativecreation.OnthissubjectRosamondHarding'sAnAnatomyof Inspiration(2ndEdn.Heffer,1942)ismostinstructive.Thereaderofthatbookmaybesurprisedtolearnhow greatanumberofauthors,artists,musicalcomposersandscientificdiscoverershaveleftitonrecordthattheir

    bestworkwasdonewhollyorpartiallywithoutconsciouseffort,andhowgreatavarietyofformsthefeelingof inspirationmaytake.Formypresentpurposeitwillbesufficienttoquoteafewexamplesfromwellknown Englishauthors. TowardstheendofhislectureTheNameandNatureofPoetry(CambridgeUniversityPress1933)A.E. Housmandescribestheconditionsthathefoundconducivetothewritingofpoetry,andthebodilysensations thatheexperiencedwheninthecreativemood.Hementionsthathehasseldomwrittenpoetryunlesshewas ratheroutofhealth.Whentakinganafternoonwalk,hesays, "afternoonsaretheleastintellectualportionofmylife...therewouldflowintomymind,witha suddenandunaccountableemotion,sometimesalineortwoofverse,sometimesawholestanza atonce,accompanied,notpreceded,byavaguenotionofthepoemwhichtheyweredestinedto formpartof...Therewouldusuallybealullofanhourorso,thenperhapsthespringwouldbubble upagain...Sometimesthepoemhadtobetakeninhandandcompletedbythebrain,whichwas apttobeamatteroftroubleandanxiety,involvingtrialanddisappointment,andsometimesending infailure." Housmanisclearlydescribingaprocessofsubconsciousactivity,withnohintofinspirationfromanexternal source.Infacthespeciallymentionsthepitofthestomachas"thesourceofthesuggestionsthusproferredto thebrain". InR.L.Stevenson'sAcrossthePlains thereisAChapteronDreams ,whichtellsusmuchmoreaboutthe developmentofhiscreativepowers.Asanotveryhappychildhehadtypicalanxietydreams,butfoundthathe hadsomecontrolastowhathedreamt,andhavingdevelopedatastefortheGeorgianperiodofhistory, "hemasqueradedthereinathreecorneredhat,andwasmuchengagedwithJacobiteconspiracy betweenthehourforbedandthatforbreakfast." Laterstill,whenhebegantowritefictionhefoundthat"thelittlepeoplewhomanageman'sinternaltheatre", whomhealsocalls"Brownies",werewillingtostageforhimsceneswhichinhiswakinglifehecouldworkup into"printableandprofitabletales".Thus,wishingtowriteastoryroundthethemeof"man'sdoublebeing",and unableaftertwodays'rackinghisbrainstothinkofaplot,hedreamttwosceneswhichbecamethenucleusof TheStrangeCaseofDr.Jek yllandMr.Hyde.AllthatcametohiminhisdreamsheputtotheBrownies'credit, butitalwayshadtoheworkedoverandcompletedinhiswakinghours.HethoughthoweverthattheBrownies had"ahandiniteventhen".SpeculatingastowhotheBrownieswere,hepointsouttheirconnectionWith himselfandhistrainingasawriter: "onlyIthinktheyhavemoretalent,andonethingisbeyonddoubt,theycantellhim(i.e.R.L.S.)a storypiecebypiecelikeaserial,andkeephimallthewhileinignoranceofwheretheyaim." IfStevenson'saccountofhischildhoodphantasiesbecomparedwithhisdescriptionofhisadultliterary activities,thechangetowards"otherness"isnoticeable.Isthechangeentirelyverbal?TheBrowniesmightbe takensimplyashisownconsciouspersonificationofhissubconscious,ortheymightdenotesomeentitythat Stevensonfelttobeexternaltohimself,thoughaccessibleonlythroughhissubconscious.Stevensonwasan earlymemberoftheSPR,andhehasputallpsychicalresearchersinhisdebtbyrelatingsofullythe developmentofhissubconscious.Thedebtwouldbestillgreaterifhehadcontrivedtobealittlemore plainspoken. Otherauthorshaverecordedthattheircharactershavebecomesoaliveastotakethedevelopmentofthestory intotheirhands,andtoholdconversationswiththem,asDickenssaysMrs.Gampdidwithhim.Thisseemsto beanexampleofthetendencyofthesubconscioustoprojectitselfintosomeexternalandindependententity,a tendencynot,ofcourse,inthisinstancepushedtothepointofcompleteacceptanceoftheprojection.Itisabig leapfromSarahGampandtheBrowniestothetranscendentBeingsandPowers,withwhomthepoetsclaimto havebeenincommunion. Iamabouttoquoteseveralpassagesinwhichthepoetsassertthateitherinsomeecstaticstate,orinthe courseofinspiration,theyhaveencounteredsomeBeingorPowerwhichhasseemedtothemoutside themselves.Considerationsofspacecompelmetodetachthesepassagesruthlesslyfromtheircontext,butthe damagethusdonemayperhapsbemitigatedbyprintingallthepassagesconsecutively,andreservingtoalater stageallcomparisonbetweenthemandtheaccountswhichhavealreadybeenquotedofotherexperiences,

    suchasthosecalled"outofthebody". I(a)"...Upledbythee[i.e.Urania] IntotheHeavenofHeavensIhavepresumed, Anearthlyguest,anddrawnempyrealair, Thytempering.Withlikesafetyguideddown, Returnmetomynativeelement... ...yetnotalone,whilethou Visitestmyslumbersnightly,orwhenMorn Purples,theEast.Stillgovernthoumysong, Uranian..." (Milton,P.L.VII,1216,2830) (b)"IfanswerablestyleIcanobtain OfmycelestialPatroness,whodeigns Hernightlyvisitationunimplored, Anddictatestomeslumbering,orinspires Easymyunpremeditatedverse... ...unlessanagetoolate,orcold Climate,oryears,dampmyintendedwing Depressedandmuchtheymayifallbemine, Notherswhobringsitnightlytomycar." (Milton,P.L.IX,2024,4447) II(c)"DaughtersofBeulah!MuseswhoinspirethePoet'sSong RecordthejourneyofimmortalMiltonthroughyourRealms. ...Comeintomyhand, Byyourmildpowerdescendingdownthenervesofmyrightarm, FromouttheportalsofmyBrain..." (Blake,Milton,BookI) (b)"SofirstIsawhim[i.e.'Milton'sshadow']intheZenithasafallingstar Descendingperpendicular,swiftastheswalloworswift: Andonmyleftfootfallingonthetarsus,enteredthere: ButfrommyleftfootablackcloudredoundingspreadoverEurope." (Blake,Milton,BookI) (c)"ThirteenyearsagoIlostabrother,andwithhisspiritIconversedailyandhourlyintheSpirit,and seehiminmyremembrance,andintheregionsofmyimagination.Ihearhisadvice,andeven nowwritefromhisdictate." (Blake,Letterof6thMay,1800) (d)"InmyBrainarestudiesandChambersfilledwithbooksandpicturesofold,whichIwroteand paintedinagesofEternitybeforemymortallife." (Blake,Letterof21stSept.1800) (e)"...forIhaveinthesethreeyearscomposedanimmensenumberofversesonOneGrandTheme, similartoHomer'sIliadorMilton'sParadiseLost...IhavewrittenthisPoemfromimmediate dictation,twelveorsometimestwentyorthirtylinesatatime,withoutPremeditationandeven againstmyWill..." (Blake,Letterof25thApril,1803) III(a)"WhileyetaboyIsoughtforghosts,andsped Thro'manyalisteningchamber,caveandruin, Andstarlightwood,withfearfulstepspursuing Hopesofhightalkwiththedeparteddead,... Iwasnotheard... Suddenthy*shadowfellonme Ishrieked,andclaspedmyhandsinecstasy!" (Shelley,HymntoIntellectualBeauty)

    *The"Thou"isthe"unseenPower"ofIntellectualBeauty.

    (b)"Whylinger,whyturnback,whyshrink,myheart? 'TisAdonaiscalls!Oh,hastenthither NomoreletLifedividewhatDeathcanjointogether" "TheBreathwhosemightIhaveinvokedinsong Descendsonme..." (Shelley,Adonais fromStanzasLIIIandLV) IV"Sowordbyword,andlinebyline, Thedeadmantouchedmefromthepast, Andallatonceitseemedatlast Hislivingsoulwasflashedonmine, "Andmineinhiswaswoundandwhirl'd Aboutempyrealheightsofthought, Andcameonthatwhichis,andcaught, Thedeeppulsationsoftheworld, "Aeonianmusicmeasuringout, ThestepsofTimetheshocksofChance TheblowsofDeath.Atlengthmytrance Wascancelled,strickenthroughwithdoubt." (Tennyson,InMemoriamXCV)*
    *IquotetheoriginalversionalteredbyTennysoninlatereditions.

    V"AMessengerofHopecomeseverynighttome, Andoffersforshortlife,eternalliberty "Butfirst,ahushofpeaceasoundlesscalmdescends Thestruggleofdistress,andfierceimpatienceends Mutemusicsoothesmybreast,unutteredharmony, ThatIcouldneverdream,tillEarthwaslosttome. "ThendawnstheInvisibletheUnseenitstruthreveals, Myoutwardsenseisgone,myinwardspiritfeels: Itswingsarealmostfreeitshome,itsharbourfound, Measuringthegulph,itstoopsanddaresthefinalbound. "Oh!dreadfulisthecheckintensetheagony Whenthecarbeginstohear,andtheeyebeginstosee Whenthepulsebeginstothrob,thebraintothinkagain Thesoultofeeltheflesh,andthefleshtofeelthechain." (EmilyBronte,ThePrisoner) Thatinallthesepassagesthepoetsarerecountingvividexperiencesoftheirownwillhardlybedoubted,evenin thecaseofThePrisoner,althoughthepassagequotedfromthatpoemissetinafictionalframework, susceptiblenonethelessofasymbolicinterpretation.NoonewouldmistakethetoneinwhichMiltonand Shelleyspeakofthesourceoftheirinspirationorconfusetheirwordswiththeconventionalinvocationsofthe Nine.Norcanitbedoubtedthattheexperiencesdescribedhaveageneralresemblanceonewithanotherin spiteofgreatdifferencesonsomepoints.Inthislatterrespecttheparallelwiththe"outofthebodyexperiences" isclose,andwhenwecometoanalysethedramaofmediumshipweshallfindparallelstheretoboththe classesofexperiencediscussedinthepresentchapter.Commontobothclassesofexperienceisthesenseof beingintouchwithsomepowerwhichdefinitelyisnottheconsciousmindofthepoet,orpercipient,asthecase maybe.Theexternalpowerssensedbythepercipientswere,itwillberemembered,ofmanykinds,andsoitis withthepoetstoo.EmilyBronte's"MessengerofHope"isasmuchanabstractionasthe"mentor"ofthe Geddescase.Blakeand"Kenwood"bothspeakofmessagesfromadeadkinsman.Milton,inwordssuggestive ofanactualoutofthebodyexperience,speaksofUraniaassistertotheEternalWisdom,andassuchsheis

    almostanaspectofDeity:Wiltseisadmonishedbyapowerwiththetraditionaldivineadjunctsofthunderand lightning.InAdonais andInMemoriamthepoweris,insomeway,thesoulofadeadman,andalso,conjoined withit,theultimaterealityoftheUniverse. TothesesourcesofinspirationBlakeaddshisownantenatalmemoriesforwhichthe"outofthebody" experiencesprovidenoparallel.OnemayhoweverbefoundinthecaseofHlneSmith,summarisedinthe nextchapter,acasewhichliesontheboundaryofdissociationandmediumship.Thesecondpassagequoted fromBlake'sMiltonisofparticularinterest.ThefallingstarthereisreminiscentofthefallingstarintheKenwood case,andthecloudofthesamepassageremindsusofWiltse'scloud.BothinthatpassageofBlakeandinthe firstpassagequotedfromthesamepoemtheideaofaparticularpartofthebody,handorfoot,beingcontrolled bytheexternalpowersuggestsaconnectionwithaphaseofthePipermediumship(seepp.116120below), whenherrighthandandarmwere,itisclaimed,underaspiritcontroldifferentfromthatoftherestofherbody. Allthesearedoubtlessdetailsinthemselvesofnoparticularsignificance,buttheymayserveascluestotrace connectionsbetweenmentalstateswhichatafirstglanceseemverydifferent. Intheoutofthebodyexperiencesthesenseofseparationfromthebodyseemstobeduetobodilyillnessor extremebodilyfatigue,or,asinsomecasesIhavenotquoted,toaseverephysicalshock,suchasconcussion inanairraidorahammeringinaboxingmatch.Itistobenotedthatoftheauthorsmentioned,Blake's eccentricitycameattimesnearinsanity,Coleridgewasanopiumaddict,Shelley,EmilyBronteandStevenson wereallconsumptives.Milton(P.L.111,155)definitelyassociateshisinspirationwithhisblindness. InviewofthedreamexperiencesmentionedatthebeginningofthischapterthedreamofwhichKublaKhanwas amemory,thedreamthatsolvedthearchaeologist'spuzzleitmaybesignificantthatMilton'sinspirationcame tohiminsleep,orintheborderlandstatefollowingonsleep("dictatestomeslumberingorwhenMornpurples theEast"),andthatitwasatnightthatTennysonfellintoatranceandEmilyBrontewasvisitedbythe MessengerofHope. Isitpossiblebycomparisonofthepointsofagreementanddifferencebetweenalltheexperiencesdescribedin thischapter,dreams,"outofthebody"cases,andstatesofinspirationandecstasyasknowntothepoets,to formapictureofthesubconsciousatworkthatwillbeofuseinthelaterstagesoftheenquiry?Itshouldbe borneinmindthatagroupofexperienceswhicharesubstantiallysimilarmayappearveryunlikeeachother whentheyemergeintoconsciousness,foreitherorbothoftworeasons,firstthateveninawelldefinedgroup therearelikelytoberealdifferencesofdetailinthesubconsciousimpressiontheycreate,andsecondlythatthe subconsciousdrawsonanextensivesymbolicrepertoryinpresentingthemtotheconsciousmind.This complicatestheproblem,butIsuggest,thatthefollowingfactorsarecommontoalltheexperiences: (a)Thepartialorcompletewithdrawalofthemindfromthepreoccupationsofordinarylife.Thewithdrawalis slightestwhen,forexample,Stevensonputsthefinishingtouches,withtheBrownies'help,toworkbegunand fairlyfaradvancedwithoutconsciouseffortonhispart.Itisatitsmaximumwhenthesleeperonwakingbelieves himselftohavebeenpresentedwithmaterialcomplete,exceptfortranscription.Casesofthislatterkindraise thequestionwhetherthereisduringsleepsubconscious,constructivementalactivity,ofwhichthewaking consciousnessretainsatmostashadowyrecollection,orwhetherintheborderlandstatefollowingsleep constructiveactivitygoesonwithapressureandataspeedwhich,whenfullyawake,wefindhardtoconceive.If Coleridgereallyhadinhismind,whenhestartedtowritedownKublaKhan,notonlythefragmentthathehas leftus,butthecompletepoemofhundredsoflineswhichhebelievedhimselftohavedreamt,itisdifficultto supposethathiscreativepoweratthemomentofwakingcouldhavecomposedthewholewithsuchspeedasto makehimbelievethatalltheworkhadbeendoneduringsleep. (b)Thereisasenseofexistenceatahigherlevelduringtheexperience,whichmaytaketheformofgreater mentalclarity,enhancedcreativepowerorecstasy,andacorrespondingdistaste,sometimesextreme,forthe returntonormal,consciouslife.Itistobenotedhoweverthatsomeveryinferiorauthorsandartistshavefeltthe senseofinspirationaskeenlyasanyofthegreatmasters. Perhapsthesituationcanbestbeexplainedbysupposingthatinalltheinstancescitedinthischapterthereis atemporaryfusionoftheconsciousmind,whenfreedfromthepreoccupationsofordinarylife,withthe subconscious,aconditionparticularlylikelytooccurintheborderlandstatebetweensleepandwaking.This wasthestateinwhichUraniadictatedtoMiltonhis"unpremeditatedverse",anditmayperhapsbestbe describedinthewordsinwhichMiltoncallsonCelestialLightto"irradiate"hismind"throughallherpowers ". Thiscomesveryneartosuggestingthatwhenallthesepoetsclaimthattheyhavebeeninspiredbyanexternal

    BeingorPower,theyhavedeludedthemselvesandhavesimplybeendrawingontheir.subconscious.Thatisa nationonewouldnotreadilyentertaineveninthecaseofStevenson'sBrownies,ifoneheldtheviewthatthe subconsciouswasnothingmorethananinferiorsectionofthemind,andthatthewholepersonalitywasclosed againstallaccesstorealityexceptthroughtheconscioususeofthefivesenses.Butiftheviewisaccepted, thattheconsciousmindhasbeenspecialisedtodealwiththeeverydaydetailsoflife,andthatthe subconscioushaswiderandmoresubtlepowersofapprehension,thereisnothingderogatorytotheBrownies, ortheDaughtersofBeulah,oreventoUraniaherselfinregardingthemallasselfdramatisationsofthe subconscious. InChapterIIIitwassuggestedthatinacrisisapparitiontherewasevidenceofconstructiveworkbythe percipient'ssubconscious,elaborateperhapsindetail,butofshortduration.Increativeimagination,ontheother hand,wehaveexamplesofsubconsciousconstructiveactivitymorecomplex,extendingoveryearsratherthan seconds,andcapableofproducingworkslikeParadiseLost,famousalikeforthearchitecturalconceptionofthe whole,andforelaborationofdetail.Butitmustbetherightsubconscious,withaspecialassociationwiththe rightperson. Evensoitwouldbeimprudenttospeakof"merelythesubconscious",sinceitisanimportantfunctionofthe subconscioustobesomethingmorethanitself,bymediatingbetweentheparticularconsciousmindwithwhich itisspeciallyassociated,andothermindswithwhichithaslessintimateandcontinuouscontact.Iftheviewof telepathyputforwardintheprecedingchaptersisevenapproximatelytrue,itisimpossibletodivideinto completelywatertightcompartmentsthesubconsciousactivitiesofmembersofapairorgroupofpersonsin telepathicrelationwitheachother,althoughformanypurposessomeoftheseactivitiesmorecloselyconcern oneofthepairthantheotheroronememberofthegroupthantherest,andmayconvenientlybereferredtoas his activities.Inthecrisisapparitionsitisthepercipient'ssubconsciousthathasthebestclaimtobe responsiblefortheconstructive,dramaticwork,butpromptedbyanexternalstimulus.Thesameprinciplemay governcreativeimagination. Severaloftheexperiencesquotedonpp.8689wereinsomedegreemystical,asaffirmingcontactwitha superhumanreality,towhichTennysonappliesthewords,"thatwhichis".Itdoesnotliewithintheprovinceof psychicalresearchtoventureanyopinionastothetruthofsuchanaffirmation,whethermadebyanyofthese poets,ormoreemphaticallystillbypersonswhomoneassociateswiththenamemystic.Onlythosewhohave hadcomparableexperienceshaveaclaimtobeheardonthispoint.If,however,andsofarasitispossibleto applyordinarystandardstoexperiencesfromwhichtheessentialpartasitwouldseemtothem,the overwhelmingvividnessandcertainty,hasbeenleftout,ascalecouldbedrawn,atnopointofwhichcoulda sharpdivisionbemade.Atoneendofthiswouldbeplacedtheauthorswhohavefeltthattheirbestworkcame independentlyoftheirconsciouseffort,withoutanydefinitefeelingastohowitcame,andattheotherthe mysticswhobelievethemselvestohavebeenintouchwiththeOne,howevertheynameit.Atvariouspointsin betweenwouldcometheauthorswhohavefelttheyhavebeenconsciousoftheinfluenceofsomeexternal sourceofpower,whichtheyproceedtopersonalise,butwithouttheintensityoffeelingorcertaintyexperienced bythemystics.WearenotjustifiedinPuttinganylimit,anyalteterminushaerens ,onthepowerofthe subconscioustoapprehendwhatlies,orappearstolie,outsidetheindividualmind,whetherasregardsthe events,eventhetrivialevents,ofordinarylife,orwhateverthereisbeyondflammantiamoeniamundi. NOTE:InMemoriam,SectionXCV:intheeditionof1878Tennyson's"conscience"inducedhimtochangethe words"Hislivingsoup,oftheoriginaleditionto"Thelivingsoul",and"his"to"this"inthenextline.Hedidnot apparentlywish,atthattimeatleast,tobemisunderstoodasclaimingthathistranceexperienceproved,as regardsArthurHallam'scontinuedpersonalexistence,arealityindependentofhisownfeeling.Hemadeno alterationinthephrase"thatwhichis",asthiswasconsistentwithhisbeliefthathehadseveraltimesbeenin touchwiththeGreatSoul. Transcendentalexperiences,aswassaidinChapterIll,startfromnormallifeandreturntoitagain.Toexpress hisawarenessofthisTennysonusesacuriousliterarydevice.Inthefourthstanzaofthissection,describingthe settingofhislonelyvigil,beforetheonsetofthetrance,hespeaksoftheknolls, "where,couchedatcase Thewhiteglimmered,andthetrees Laidtheirdarkarmsaboutthefield." Andinthethirteenthstanza,afterhistrancehadended,herepeatsthesamewords.

    EmilyBront'sThePrisoner.Aparalleltotheexperiencedescribedheremaybefoundintheaccountgivenby LucySnoweofthebeginning,developmentandendofhertranceinChaptersXVandXVIofCharlotteBront's Villette.WritingtoG.H.Lewesinaletter,quotedinTheBrontStorybyMargaretLane(p.194),Charlotte Brontewrites: "Whenauthorswritebest,oratleastwhentheywritemostfluently,aninfluenceseemstowaken inthem,whichbecomestheirmasterwhichwillhaveitsownway...Isitnotso?Andshouldwe trytocounteractthisinfluence?Canweindeedcounteractit?"

    Chapter8:Dissociation
    W.H.Salter ITISindeedasharpdescentfromtheempyrealairofthepoettothe"GorgonsandHydrasandChimeras dire"ofthepsychiatrist,creaturesthatarenowsofamiliartothepublicthroughfilmsandnovelsthatsome justificationmayseemtobeneededforinvitingthereadertobestowfurtherattentionuponthemhereThe reasonfordoingsoisthatcasesof"splitpersonality"sometimesshowcuriousparallelswithsomeofthe incidentsofmediumship,andaresometimesreportedtobeaccompaniedbytheproductionofparanormal phenomenabothofthe"physical"and"mental"types.Theseaspectsofdissociationhavethereforeaspecial significanceforpsychicalresearch.Thereareotheraspectswhichraisemanyproblems,psychologicaland physiological,whichlieoutsidethescopeofthisdiscussion. IwillfirstsummariseacasereportedinSPRProc.VI1221257.In1826therewasborninNewYorkaboy calledAnselBourne,whowastrainedasacarpenterandcarriedonthattradeuntil1857.Inhisyouthhewas religious,butbecameincourseoftimeaconvincedatheist,anddevelopedfeelingsofenmityfortheMinister wholivednextdoor.InAugustofthatyearhehadasevereillness,aggravatedbyasunstroke,andbrokedown severaltimesonattemptingtoresumework.Onthe28thOctoberhehadastronginternalfeelingthatheought togoto"Meeting"attheChapel,but"hisspiritroseupindecidedandbitteropposition,andhesaidwithin himself'Iwouldratherhestruckdeafanddumbforeverthantogothere'."Afewminuteslaterhelostsight, hearingandspeechhebecameperfectlyhelpless,buthismindremainedquiteclear,andheretainedthe senseoftouch.Twentysixhourslaterhissightwasperfectlyrestored,andhewroteonaslateaskingthe Ministerforforgiveness.Healsoasked,bywriting,foraprayermeetingtobeheldinhishouse,andattended theChapelseveraltimes,beingstilldeafanddumb.OnSunday,15thNovember,hewroteonaslatealong message,whichtheMinisterreadtothecongregation.Hethenascendedthepulpit.Inaninstanthishearing andspeechwerecompletelyrestored.Afortnightlaterhehadavision,inconsequenceofwhichhebecamean evangelist.Atfirsthetravelledagreatdealbutastheresultofhiswife'sdisapprovalofhisfrequentabsences fromhomeheconfinedhisactivitiestohisownneighbourhood.Thistroubledhimandweighedonhis conscienceandmayhavecontributedtothesecondgreatcrisisofhislife. On17thJanuary,1887,hewentfromhishometoProvidence,R.I.,todrawmoneytopayforafarmhewas buying.Hestabledhishorse,drewseveralhundreddollarsfromthebank,paidvariousbills,andstartedtovisit asisterlivinginthattown.Heneverreachedhissister'shouse,ortookawayhishorse. About1stFebruary,1887,therearrivedinNorristown,Pa.,amanwhorentedastareroomthere,livinginhalfof itandusingtheotherhalfasasmalltoyandsweetshop.HewentbythenameofA.J.Brown.Therewas nothingpeculiarinhisbehaviour,whichwasquietandrespectable,andheattendedtheMethodistChurch regularly.OntheI5thMarch,aboutfiveinthemorning,heheardanexplosionlikeagunshot,andwoketofind himselfinastrangebedinatownhedidnotrecognise.Thelastthinghecouldrememberwasvisiting Providence.HewasamazedtolearnfromaneighbourthathewasinNorristownandthateightweekshad elapsedsincehelefthome.AnephewfromProvidencecameover,settleduphisbusinessaffairsandtookhim backtoRhodeIsland.Afewyearslaterhewashypnotisedandintrancegaveanaccountofhisdoingsand travelsbetweenthe17thJanuaryandthe1stFebruary,whichwassubstantiallyverifiedbyenquiryattheplaces wherehesaidhehadstayedenroute. Thiscaseshowsdissociationinaverysimpleform.InneitherofthetwocrisesofAnselBourne'slifewasthere anychangeOfcharacter.InthefirstcrisistherewastemporarylossofcontrolOfseveralbodilyfunctionssight, hearing,speechandabruptchangeofopinion,butnolossofpersonalidentityorofmemory.Inthesecond crisistherewaslossofidentity,changeofOccupation,andlossofmemoryforalmost,notquite,everything belongingtohislifebeforethe17thJanuary,andforeverythingthathadhappenedbetweenthenandthe1st February.MemoryoftheearlierlifereturnedspontaneouslyinMarch:memoryoftheintervalbetween17th Januaryand1stFebruarywastappedunderhypnosis. TheBeauchampcase,knownbynameatleasttomostreaders,wasmorecomplex.MissBeauchampof Boston,Mass.,cametoDr.MortonPrincefortreatmentin1898,whenshewastwentythreeyearsold,andhis reportofthecase,TheDissociationofaPersonality(Longmans),isadocumentofabsorbinginterest.Atthe ageof13,MissBeauchamp,asensitivechildmuchgiventodaydreaming,hadasevereshockwithdisastrous

    resultsonhermentalstability.Hermother,whomsheidolised,gavebirthtoababy,andwhilethemotherwas seriouslyill,MissBeauchampwasgiventhebabytohold.Itdiedinherarms,andhermotherdiedsoonafter. MissBeauchampherselfbecame"delirious",asthedoctorsputit,awordprobablyimplyingdissociation.Afew yearslatershebegantotrainasahospitalnurseandin1893,whilebeingtrained,underwentasecondshock, followedbyalongerspellofdissociation,fromwhichshewasstillsufferingwhenshecameunderPrince'scare. WhenPrincefirstknewher,shewas,inhiswords,"a'neurasthenic'ofapronouncedtype",sufferinggreatly fromheadaches,insomnia,bodilypainsandothertroubles.Shewaswelleducatedandreligiousandhadstrong literarytastes,butshewasmorbidlyconscientiousandreticent.Itwasonlyaftertreatmenthadproceededfor sometimethatPrincelearntoftheshockshehadhadin1893.InhisbookPrincegavethenameBItothe personalitywithwhichhethusbecameacquainted.PrincetreatedBIbyhypnoticsuggestion,andfoundthat whenoutofthehypnoticstateshehadnomemoryofwhattookplacewithinit.TothehypnotisedBIhegave thenameBII.Thetreatmentgivenproducedamarked,thoughtemporary,improvementinappetite,vigourand generalbodilyhealth. Butafterafewweeks'treatmentthepatient,whileinhypnosis,firstdeniedmakingcertainstatementswhich hadbeenmadeduringapreviousperiodofhypnosis,andthenadmittedhavingmadethem.Onalateroccasion, notlongafter,thehypnotisedpatientspokeofherselfasshewasinherwakingstate,as"She".Inthehypnotic stateshepersistedinsaying"no"whenPrincesaid"Youare'She'",andgaveasherreasonforthedenial "Because'she'doesnotknowthesamethingsasIdo."ThisnewpersonalityBIIlateradoptedforherselfthe name"Sally",bywhichshehasbecomedeservedlyfamous. SallyatfirstmanifestedherselfonlywhenBIhadbeenhypnotised,butsoonBIfoundherselfbeinggovernedin herwakinglifebyimpulsesalientoherowncharacter,tellingfibs,forexample.ThenonedayinJune,1898, whenBIwasdaydreaming,Sallymadehertakebothhandsandrubhereyes.SoSally"gothereyesopen", andwasinherownwords"ontopoftheheapatlast".Shewasabletocontrolthebodyforhoursatatime.BI wouldfadeout,andthencometo,perhapswithalightedcigaretteinherhand:shedetestedsmoking.She wouldfindthatshehadunaccountably"lost"severalhours,andthattheintervalhadbeenemployedbySally, whowasinsusceptibletofatigue,intakingthebodyalongwalkwhichleftit,whenBIreturned,dogtired,orin writingindiscreetletters,whichBIhadtodisown.SallyinfactenjoyedtormentingBI,whowasaneasyvictim. Butshemetatougherantagonistwhenin1899BIVappeared.Therewerethenthreepersonalities,BI,Sally andBIVcontrollingthebodyturnandturnabout,aswellastheBIIofthehypnoticstate.Eachofthethreehad adifferenttemperament.Eachhadalsoherownstreamofmemoryandconsciousness,andSallyclaimedto haveaccesstothememoriesoftheothertwo.Noneofthem,however,wascapableofmaintaininganormal, healthyexistenceforanylengthoftimecontinuously.BIwasanultrasensitiveandconscientiousadult.BIV wasalsoadult,butselfreliantandselfassertive,withtastesthatingeneralwereexactlytheoppositeofBl's. Sallyhadallthespontaneityandmischievousnessofachildoftwelveorthirteen.Therewereverylargegapsin BI'smemory,especiallyofthingsthathadhappenedsincethehospitalepisodein1893:shehadnoknowledge ofwhatoccurredwhileeitherSallyorBIVwereuppermost.BIVhadnoclearmemoryofthingsthathappened betweenthehospitalepisodeandherownemergencein1899,butshecametoacquireagooddealof knowledgeofthatperiodpartlybyinferencefromwhatsheheard,partlyfromthingscominghazilyand unconsciouslyintohermind,andpartlyby"deliberate"effortofrecollection.Sallyclaimedtoremember everythingthathadhappenedsinceearlyinfancy,bothbeforeandafterthehospitalepisode,andwhethershe, BIorBIVwereuppermost.ShealsoknewBl'sthoughts ,butnotatfirstBIV's,andthislackofknowledge preventedherbeingabletobullyBIVasshehadbulliedBl. EventuallybyaprocessofsuggestionPrinceachievedasynthesisofBIandBIVwhichhecalls"theRealMiss Beauchamp".Thismeant"squeezing"Sally,whoatfirststronglyobjected,butcametoacquiesceinthe processandeventofurtherit.OneisgladtolearnthatinthefinalproductthemoreengagingofSally's characteristics,soregrettablylackingintheothertwopersonalities,werenotwhollydestroyed. AmongallthepsychologicalsubtletiescarefullyanalysedbyPrincethestatusofSallyistheonemost importantforanunderstandingofmediumship.TreatmentofthekindappliedbyPrincetendsperhapsinthe earlystagestoemphasiseanydissociationsthatmayhavearisenspontaneously,andmayevengosofarasto initiateothers,buthewasdoubtlessrightinrepudiatingsuggestionsthatSallywasnomorethananartifactof hisowncreation.Herchildishnesswasthatoftemperamentratherthanofintelligence.Shehadallthe spontaneousgaietyvariedwithfractiousnessofalivelychild,andwasveryshrewdinthewaychildrenoftenare. Butonoccasionshewouldalsoshowapowerofsustainedthinking,andagiftforexpressinghertrainsof thoughtwhichseemtomeexceptionalevenamongcleverchildren.Itisreasonabletosupposethatthetwo

    severeemotionalshocksexperiencedbyMissBeauchampduringheradolescence,firstatthetimeofher mother'sdeathandthenatthetimeoftheepisodeatthehospital,preventedherpersonalitydevelopingina balancedwayasawhole.IfhoweverPrincewasrightinregardingSallyasa"coconscious"entity,i.e.one capableofgrowthanddevelopmentwithinthesubconscious,thatmightaccountforthecomparativelymature sidethatSallysometimesshowed. OnoneoccasionBIVtriedtalkingtoSallyandaskingherquestionswhich,aftersomeresistance,Sally answeredinwriting.Tothequestion,"Whoareyou?"Sallyreplied"ASpirit",butthisanswerneednotbetaken tooseriouslyasrepresentingSally'srealviewsofherself.ForsomereasonPrinceheadstheChapter(XXII)in whichthisepisodeisnarrated"Sallyplaysthemedium",buttheonlyfoundationforthisassertionisthatSally disclosedmattersunknowntoBIV.Itisdesirabletomakethispointplain,asintheothercasesofmultiple personalitynowtobementionedaverymuchcloserapproximationtomediumshipcanbefound. ForinstanceintheDorisFischercase,reportedintheProc .oftheAmericanSPR1915,1916andreviewedin SPRProc .Vol.XXIX,wherethesubjectwasagirlwhohadhadaverysevereshockinearlychildhood,there wereseveralpersonalitiesbearingageneralresemblancetotheBeauchampfamilygroup.Whenin1909,atthe ageoftwentyone,shecameintouchwiththeeminentAmericanpsychicalresearcher,WalterPrince(1),her motherhadbeendeadformorethantwoyearsandherdrunkenfatherhadusedherasahouseholddrudge, underfeedingandoverworkingher.Threepersonalitiesweretheninjointoccupationofthebody,"RealDoris" whosincethemother'sdeathhadonlyachievedconsciousexistenceforafewminutesatatime,"SickDoris", "morbidlytheslaveofdutyandlackinginhumour",andMargaretwhowaschildlikeinherlimitationsand enjoyedtormentingSickDoris.In1911WalterPrincediscoveredafourthpersonality,whichonlymanifested whenMargaretwasasleep,andsobecameknownas"SleepingMargaret":shehadamaturemindandhelped WalterPrincewithadviceinthetreatmentofthecase.
    (1)NorelationofMortonPrinc e.

    Bysuggestionandpersuasion,withouthypnosis,WalterPrincesucceededineliminatingfirstSickDorisand thenMargaret,leavingRealDorisastheonlypersonalityactiveduringwakinghours,withSleepingMargaretstill uppermostduringsleep.WalterPrincewaspuzzledastoSleepingMargaret'snatureandorigin,matterson whichshewasreticent.Relyingonherapparentimmunitytotheinfluenceofsuggestion,heputittoherthat shewasaspirit.Thissherepeatedlydenied,butqualifiedherdenialswithambiguousstatements.Itwas eventuallydecidedthatDorisshouldhavesittingswithamedium,andwhenthishadbeenarrangedSleeping Margaretwrote(seeSPRProc .XXIXp.394), "Iamaspirit,socalledbypeoplewholiveonearth.IdonotknowwhetherIhaveanameornot.I onlyknowthatIwassentbysomeonehighertoguardDoriswhenshewasthreeyearsold." Thenshesaid, "There,youmaybelieveasmuchofthatasyoulike." DorisFischerwaslateronadoptedbyWalterandMrs.PrinceastheirdaughterandwasknownasTheodosia Prince.Whileshewasamemberoftheirhousehold,occurrencesofanostensiblyparanormalkindtookplacein threehouseswheretheylived.TheywereobservedbyWalterPrinceandformedthesubjectofareportbyhim totheBostonSPRofwhichhewastheExecutiveOfficer,underthetitle"ThePsychicintheHouse''(Boston SPRProc .Vol.I,1926).Someoftheoccurrenceswererapsandotherauditoryphenomena,astothe paranormalityofwhichWalterPrince,amanwithahighlycriticalmindbutsufferingfromdeafness,may possiblyhavebeenmistaken.ButtherewerealsocrystalvisionsseenbyMissPrincerelatingtopasteventsin thethreehouses,someofwhichwereconfirmedbypreviousoccupants,andthese,inWalterPrince'sview, couldonlywithextremeimprobabilitybeassignedtohernormallyacquiredknowledge. Astillcloserapproachtomediumshipappearsin"theWatsekaWonder".In1871therewerelivingatWatseka, Illinois,twofamiliesnamedVennumandRoff:forafewmonthsinthatyeartheylivedneareachother,but nothingmorethanaslightacquaintancegrewbetweenthemduringthattime.AfterthattheVennumsmovedto theotherendofthecity.TheyhadadaughternamedLurancy,bornin1864ataplaceaboutsevenmilesfrom Watseka.LaterinthatyeartheymovedintoanotherState,andtheymadevariousothermovesbeforesettlingin Watsekain1871.TheRoffshadsettledinWatsekain1859.Theyhadadaughter,Mary,bornin1846,whodied inWatsekain1865,whenLurancyVennumwasaboutayearandahalfold.MaryRoffhadsufferedfrom periodsofinsanity.

    AsasmallchildLurancywashealthy,butin1877whenshewasthirteen,shebeganhavingfitsortrances, sometimesseveraltimesaday,andthesecontinueduntiltheendofJanuary1878.Inthetrancesshehad ecstaticvisionsofheavenandangels,andofpeoplewhohaddied,includingasmallbrotherandsister.Onthe 31stJanuary1878theRoffspersuadedtheVennumstocallinaDr.Stevens,whowasastrangertothem.He foundLurancylookinglikean"oldhag",sullenandrefusingtospeakwithanyoneexcepthimself.Inhis presenceshehadafitwhichherelievedbyhypnotisingher.Whenshebecamecalm,shesaidthatshehad beencontrolledbyevilspirits,andhesuggestedsheshouldfindabetterControl.Shethenmentionedthename ofMaryRoffwho,shesaid,wantedtocome. Mary'sfathersaidthathisdaughterhadbeeninheavenfortwelveyears,butthatheandhiswifewouldbeglad tohavehercome.HetoldLurancythatMaryhadbeenusedtothesameconditionsassheherself,andLurancy saidthatMarywouldtaketheplaceofthepreviousevilControls. ThenextdayVennumtoldRoffthatLurancyclaimedtobeMaryandwas"homesick".Sheremainedwiththe Vennumsforseveraldays,beingwellbehaved,butnotknowingthefamily,and"constantlypleadingtogo home",i.e.totheRoffhousehold.Onthe11thFebruaryshewassentbytheVennumstothehouseoftheRoffs whereshemettheRofffamilyinamostaffectionateway.Beingaskedhowlongshewouldstay,shesaid,"The angelswillletmestaytillsometimeinMay",andsheinfactstayedwiththemtillthe21stMay,1878.During thisperiodshewasahappymemberoftheRofffamily.Sheoccasionallywentintotrance,andtalkedwith angelsandotherspirits,butherphysicalhealthgreatlyimproved. ShereadilyrecognisedallthemembersoftheRofffamilyandtheirfriends,callingthembythepetnamesMary hadused,andcallingalady,whohadremarriedsinceMary'sdeath,byherpreviousname.Sheremembered variousincidents,someofthen,trivial,occurringduringMary'slife.Sheseemedalsotohaveparanormal knowledgeofcontemporaryevents.Thussheannouncedoneafternoonthather"brother",FrankRoff,then apparentlyingoodhealth,wouldbetakenseriouslyillthatnightashappened.ShethendemandedthatDr. Stevensshouldbesentfor,anddeclaredthathewouldbefoundatacertainhouse.Tillswasnotwherethe Roffsbelievedhimtobe,buttheysentthereandfoundhim. Onthe19thMay,1878,Lurancyforatimeresumedfullpossessionofherownbody,andrecognisedher brother,HenryVennum.Onthe21stshetookaformalfarewelloftheRofffamilyandtheirfriends,andwas escortedtoherfather'sofficebyamarriedRoffdaughter.OnarrivingattheVennum'shomesherecognisedall theVennumfamily,andwasperfectlyhappywiththem.WhenDr.Stevenscalledthenextdayhehadtobe introducedasastranger.ShelivedwiththeVennumsuntil1882whenshemarriedafarmer,andtwoyearslater movedfurtherWest.UntilthismovetheRoffscontinuedtoseeher,andshewouldgivethemlongmessages fromMary.Herhealthremainedgood. ThecasewasreportedbyDr.StevensintheReligioPhilosophicalJournalfor1879,andHodgson,the investigatoroftheAnselBournecase,contributedtothesamepaperareportofavisitpaidbyhimtoWatseka in1890,whenhecrossexaminedseveraloftheprincipalwitnesses.Hefailedhowevertogetareplytoletters sentbyhimtoLurancyherself.SomeyearslaterHodgsonreportedthecasetotheSPR:seeJournalXpp.98 104. Itmaybedoubtedwhetheras"MaryRoff",Lurancyevershowedparanormalknowledge.Althoughtherehad neverbeenintimatefriendshipbetweenthetwofamiliesbefore1878,theRoffsandVennumshadlivedinthe sametownfornearlysevenyears,andforashorttimehadbeencloseneighbours.Noonecansaywith certaintyhowmuchgossipLurancymaynothaveheardabouttheRoffs,andparticularlyabouttheirdaughter Mary,whoseillnesshadbeenmuchdiscussedlocally.Dr.Stevens'sreportisgenerallyacceptedasan accurateaccountofwhatcameunderhisownobservation,buthehadhadnospecialtrainingintesting evidenceofsupposedlyparanormalevents,andHodgson,whohadhadtherequisitetraining,cameonthe scenetoolatetoclearupthedoubtsonthispoint.Hispersonalopinion,however,wasthatthecasebelonged "initsmainmanifestationstothespiritisticcategory",meaningpresumablyby"mainmanifestations"the incidentsconnectedwiththeMaryRoffControl.HeevidentlyconsideredthatthroughthatControlparanormal powersweredisplayed.OnneitherpointdidhewinthesupportofallhiscolleaguesontheSociety'sCouncil. Theimportantpointhoweverforthepresentpurposeisthatthecasestartedasoneofpathologicaldissociation andwasatfirstmarkedbytheappearanceofControls,suchasthosethatconfrontedDr.Stevenswhenhewas calledin,whogavenoevidenceofanexistenceindependentofLurancy.Whateverviewthereforebetakenofthe MaryRoffControl,thecasecanproperlybecitedasanexampleofasecondarypersonalitydramatisedasa groupofspiritsofthedead.

    ThecasessofarcitedinthischapterhappenalltohaveoccurredintheUnitedStates.Parallelinstancescould havebeenquotedfromBritishandContinentalsources.Thelastcasetobequoted,whichdiffersinvarious waysfromtheprecedingones,isfromSwitzerland. IntheclosingyearsofthenineteenthcenturytherewaslivingatGenevaayoungwomanwhoheldwithsuccess aresponsiblebusinessposition.Shewashealthyinbodyandmind,andhercuriouspsychicexperiencesdo notseemeithertohavebeencausedbyherstateofhealth,oryettohaveaffecteditinanyway.Shegave sittings,withoutacceptingpayment,toacircleoffriends.ProfessorFlournoyofGenevaUniversityattended thesesittings,madeastudyofhercaseandreportedonitinabooktheEnglishtranslationofwhichiscalled FromIndiatothePlanetMars .InthisbooksheisgiventhepseudonymHlneSmith. ThepsychicexperiencesofHlne'sadultlifehadtheirrootsinincidentsofherchildhood.Althoughbothher parentswereProtestants,shewasforsomereasonbaptisedinaCatholicChurch.Thiscircumstance,when shelearntofit,lentcolourtoafantasyofaverycommontype,thattherewassomemysteryaboutherbirth, andthatshewasreallysomeonedifferentfrom,andofcoursesuperiorto,themiddleclassyoungwomanshe seemedtoherneighbourstobe.Thenattheageoften,whenreturningonedayfromschool,shewasattacked byadog,fromwhichshewasrescuedbyaman,apparentlyamemberofareligiousorder,wearingabrown robe.Thisincidentcausedagreatshocktoher.Shehadduringchildhoodrecurrentvisionsandother experiences,whichledontohertakingpartinsances. HerfirstControlclaimedtobeVictorHugo,butarivalsoonappearedwhogavethenameofLeopold.Atasitting inFebruary,1893,LeopoldpulledawaythechaironwhichHlnewasabouttosit.Forthemostparthowever hewasfriendlytoher,andshefeltthatatvarioustimesinhernormallifehehadhelpedandprotectedher.He claimed,duringoneofhertrances,tohavebeenthemaninthebrownrobewhohadrescuedherfromthedog. Wheninhernormalconditionhoweversheknewthatherrescuerhadbeenalivingmanofherowntime,while LeopoldestablishedhimselfinherbeliefastheeighteenthcenturywonderworkerCagliostro.IfLeopoldwas Cagliostro,thenHlnemusthavebeenhiswife,butonlearningdoubtsastothehistoricityofthatlady,she becameconvincedshewasthereincarnationofMarieAntoinette.InOctober1894shelearntthatshewasalso areincarnationofamedievalIndianprincess,Simandini,whosehusbandhadbeenrebornasProf.Flournoy. UndertheguidanceofLeopoldshevisitedtheplanetMars,learntthelanguage,andonherreturntoearth describedanddrewpicturesoftheinhabitants,theirhousesandthescenery,sothatinadditiontoprevious existencesonearth,shewasinherlatestincarnationaninhabitantbothofearthandMars.Someofthe Martianswereoldfriends,suchasthemagicianAstane,formerlytheIndianmagicianKanga. Thevariouscharactersofthiselaboratedramacouldbeevokedatsances,buttheywouldalsointerveneon theirowninitiative,asitwere.ThusHlnewouldbegintowritealetterinherordinaryhandwritingandLeopold wouldcompleteitinhishandwriting,which,incidentally,borenoresemblancetothatofthehistoricCagliostro. TheMarieAntoinetteControlwoulddomuchthesame. TheMartianlanguage,aswrittenbyHlne,reproducedwithsurprisingaccuracysomeofthegrammaticaland syntacticalpeculiaritiesofhernativeFrench.HerreminiscencesofherIndianpreexistence,bothsofarasthey coincidedwithhistoricalfact,andonpointswheretheywereatvariancewithit,keptclosetothestatementsto befoundinanoldhistoryofIndiawritteninFrench.Hlne,whosebonafides wasabovesuspicion,hadno consciousrecollectionofhavingreadthebook,butcopiesofitwereaccessibleinGenevanpubliclibraries.Her Martianlanguagewasrathermoreelaborateandcoherentthanthelanguagewhichchildrenofteninventto puzzletheirelders,butmayreasonablybetakenasahighlydevelopedspecimenofthatclass.TheSimandini andMadeAntoinetteControlsseemtobebothexamplesoftheselfmagnifyingfantasybasedonthesupposed Mysteryofherbirth,aidedsofarasregardstheIndianepisode,bysubconsciousmemoryofthehistorybook mentionedabove. InthreepointsthecaseofHlneSmithdiffersstrikinglyfromthoseofMissBeauchamp,DorisFischerand LurancyVennum.Forthewholeperiodwhenshewasunderobservationhergeneralhealth,mentaland physical,wasgood,andshewasabletotakeanactiveandusefulpartinlife.Hermediumshipwasfully developed.Theprincipalpersonalitiesofthedramawereallherselfastransplantedfromanotherplanet,orfrom otheragesonthisplanet,andthesubordinateroleswerefilledbyGenevanfriendsoracquaintancesslightly disguised. TheincidentofthedogwhichattackedherleftpermanenttracesbothonHlne'sconsciousandsubconscious mind,ontheformerasahorrorofdogsingeneral,onthelatterintheproductionofthetriadofwonderworkers,

    Leopold,Kanga,Astane,thefirstidentifiedbyherwithheractualprotectorfromthedog.Butbeforehehad establishedhimselfinabeneficentrole,Leopold,bypullingthechairfromunderHlne,showedthathewas notfreefromthetendencytoannoy,commonamongsecondarypersonalities,evenifhenevershowedthe persistenthostilitytoherthatSallyshowedtoBIandBIV.Theshockofthedogincidentdidnothowevershatter Hlne'spersonality.Thismayhavebeenoneofthereasonsforthereincarnationistformthatthemediumship took.AHlnetransplantedtonineteenthcenturyGenevafrommedievalIndiaoreighteenthcenturyFranceor theplanetMarswasstillHlne,despiteallchangesofname,placeandtime. Buttheremayhavebeenotherreasons.IntheEnglishspeakingcountriesreincarnationistdoctrinehas,upto thepresent,affectedspiritualismmuchlessthanelsewhere,probablybecausemodernspiritualismwasborna hundredyearsagointheUnitedStatesasoneamongmanyvarietiesofmoreorlessChristianbeliefthen flourishingordevelopingthere.InmostLatincountriesontheotherhandoppositiontospiritualismbythe dominantreligionwasfromthestartabsolute,andthespiritualistmovementwasnottiedtotraditionalChristian viewsofthelifeafterdeath.Asanaturalconsequencereincarnation,whichhasthroughouttheagesbeenpart andparcelofmanyreligiousandphilosophicalsystems,hasfounditcomparativelyeasytogainadherencein Latincountries,evenamongnonCatholiccommunitiessuchastheGenevaofsixtyyearsago. Thecasesdiscussedinthischaptermaynaturallyraiseadoubtwhetherhumanpersonalityisnotsomutable andfragmentaryastomakeitabsurdtosupposethatitcouldconceivablysurvivethedeathofthebody.Ifthere issurvival,isitSallywhoisdestinedtosurvive,orBIorBIVortheMissBeauchampcreated(orwasit reconstructed?)byMortonPrince'sprofessionalskill?Thisdifficultyhasbeenfamiliartoallwhohavecombined thestudyofdissociationwiththatofparanormalphenomena.Myers,forexample,inHumanPersonalityandits SurvivalofBodilyDeath,abookwhosetitleshowstheconclusiontowhichhisargumentisdirected,after discussingfullyinhisfirstfivechapterscasesofthekindquotedinthischapterandtheprecedingone,and muchothermatterindicativeofthecomplexitiesofpersonalityaswell,writesasfollowsintheopening paragraphofhissixthchapter: "Ourviewofthesubliminalselfmustpassinthischapterthroughaprofoundtransition.The glimpseswhichwehavetillnowobtainedofithaveshownitassomethingincidental,subordinate, fragmentary.Buthenceforthitwillgraduallyassumethecharacterofsomethingpersistent, principal,unitaryappearingatlastasthedeepestandmostpermanentrepresentativeofman's truebeing." Myersdidnotlivetocompletehisbook,afactwhichmayperhapsaccountfortheinconsistenciesinhisviews ofthesubliminalwhichhiscriticshavepointedout. Amongthesecriticswas(Gerald)LordBalfour,whowasveryfamiliarwiththeliteratureofalternatingand multiplepersonalities.InhisPresidentialaddress(SPRProc .XIX)Balfourputforwardtheviewthatthehuman organismwas"polypsychic",thatistosaythatitconsisted,sofarasitspsychicalelementswereconcerned, ofcentreslinkedtogetherbytelepathy,oneofthepsychicalcentresbeingthecontrollingself.Thisviewhe elaboratedinhisstudyofMrs.Willett'smediumshipinSPRProc .Vol.XLIII.Althoughhisviewdifferedsowidely fromthatofMyers,itiswellknownthatliebelievednolessstronglyinsurvival. Anargumenthassometimesbeenbasedoncasesofdualormultiplepersonalitythat,iftwoormore"minds" (orwhateverwordispreferred)arespeciallyconnectedwithonebody,eachwithdifferentmemories, temperaments,capacities,theycannotallbeconditionedbythebodywhichtheyshare.One,orpossiblyboth orallofthem,mustthereforebeselfsubsistentinlife,andmightwellsocontinueafterthedeathofthebody.If so,thesamewouldbetrueofall"minds",includingthoseofpersonswhosepsychologicalmakeupwas normal. Modernpsychologicalresearchhashowever,Iunderstand,reducedthestatusofsecondarypersonalitiestothat ofmoodsoftheprincipalpartner.Ifthatisso,theargumentforsurvivalfromsplitpersonalitiescannolongerbe maintained.Itwasalwaysatwoedgedargument,asthepassagejustquotedfromMyersshows,andits disappearanceisnotonethatbelieversinsurvivalhaveanycausetoregret.

    Chapter9:TheControlofMediums
    W.H.Salter WHILEMEDIUMSmightclaimremotedescentfromsuchancientandexaltedpersonsastheSibylwho guidedAeneasthroughtheworldofthedead,theirpedigreeinthedirectlinedoesnotgobackmuchmorethan acenturyandisofhumbleorigin.Twoyounggirlsinfact,whoin1848werelivinginafarmhouseinArcadia, StateofNewYork,MargarettaFoxaged15,andhersisterKatieagedtwelve.Ontheeveningofthe31stMarch, afterthetwogirlshadgonetobed,rapswereheardwhichansweredquestionsputinthepresenceofabouta dozenpersons,mostlyneighbourscalledinbytheparents.Correctanswersweregiventosuchquestionsas theagesofvariousneighbours,thenumberoftheirchildren,andofthedeathsthathadoccurredintheir families.Inreplytoaquestionastowhowasgivingtheanswersitwasstatedtobeapedlarwhohadbeen murderedonthespotforasumof$500hehadbeencarrying.Thereisnoreasontosupposethatthepedlaror his$500everexisted. Itwashis spiritthatwascreditedbytheArcadianswithproducingtheraps,thoughitwasnoticedthatatfirst theydidnotoccurunlessthegirlswerepresent.Theirfamegrew:togetherwithaneldersistertheygavesittings forrapsinseveraltowns.AfteranexhibitionwhichtheygaveatRochester,N.Y.,threeprofessorsofthelocal universitydeclaredthattherapswereproducedbydeliberatemovementsofthegirls'kneejoints,butthisdid notcheckthegrowthofthemovementtheyhadsetonfoot.Rapsbrokeoutinhousestheyhadnevervisited. Therewasanepidemicofrapping,andby1851thereweresaidtobeahundredMediumsinNewYorkCity. ThemediumisticmovementsoonspreadtoEurope,withtheFoxsistersamongtheleaders.Greathoweveras wastheirfame,itwasovershadowedbythatofD.D.Home,whopaidhisfirstvisittoEnglandin1855.Themost famousofallmediums,hegavesittingsinmanycountriestoroyalties,andtopersonseminentinotherwalksof life,scientistslikeWilliamCrookes,aridwriterslikeElizabethBarrettBrowning.Heistheoriginalfromwhom RobertBrowning,whointenselydislikedHome'sinfluenceoverhiswife,drewMr.Sludge,theMedium,an admirablestudyoftherelationsbetweenthesilliertypeofsitterandthelessreputabletypeofmedium,but unfairinoneimportantpoint,ifthereaderisintendedtoidentifySludgewithHome.Sludgeinthepoemis caughtcheatingand,thoughtherewereseveralsuspiciousincidentsinHome'scareer,fraudwasneverproved againsthim. MessagesclaimingtocomefromthespiritsofthedeadweregiventhroughHome,buttheydonotseemin themselvestohavebeenveryimpressive.In1926LordDunravenpublishedthroughtheSPR(Proc .Vol.XXXV) theaccountofhissittingswithHomewhichhehadprintedforprivatecirculationin1870.Tothenewissue OliverLodgecontributedanIntroductioninwhichhelistsandclassifiesthephenomenadescribedunderten headings,nineofthemreferringtophenomenaofthepurely"physical"type.Theremainingoneisthesocalled "directvoice",inwhichmessagesaregiveninwhatisclaimedtobethevoiceoftheCommunicator:sinceitis theresemblanceofthevoice,andnotthecontentofthemessage,thatisconsideredimportant,thisisinfact as"physical"aphenomenonastheothernine. ManyofHome's"physical"phenomenaareextremelydifficulttoexplainawaybynormalmeans,unlessone attributestothemanyeminentwitnessesofthemanastoundingincompetenceasobserversandasrecorders ofwhattheyobserved.Butwhilethesewitnesseshaverecordedthedeepimpressionmadeonthembysuch featsasHome'stakinginhishandsaredhotcoalfromthefireandplacingitontheheadofanoldgentleman withoutdoinganinjurytohisownhandortheother'shead,itisnot,Ithink,reportedthatwhiledoingthisanyof thosewhosawitexclaimed,"HowcharacteristicofpoordearSoandso!justhowheusedtobehave!"Physical phenomenamay,possibly,provideevidenceoftheexistenceofsomephysicalforcenotatpresentrecognised bysciencetheyarenoevidenceatallofthesurvivalofanypersonwhohasdepartedthislife,unlesseither thereispresentatthesittingaformperceptibletothesitters'sensesandsuchasthesurvivingspiritmay reasonablybesupposedtoinhabit,orelsethereoccursbehaviourdistinctiveofthebodilyactivityofthatperson. ThequestionastothegenuinenessandoriginofmaterialisedformswassufficientlydiscussedinChapterVI. Astophysicalphenomenapurportingtobeproducedbyasurvivingspirit,themoreparanormaltheyaretheless likelyaretheytobedistinctiveorevenappropriate,andviceversa,sincetheconditionsofordinarylifearevery differentfromthoseofaproperlycontrolledsance.Itis,forexample,acommonoccurrenceinsancesheldin thedarkforatambourinetobeshaken,ostensiblybythecommunicatingspirit.Thenumberofpersons addictedtothispracticeinlifecannotbeconsiderable.Itisahabitwhich,ifthephenomenaaregenuine,we

    mustsupposeweadoptwhenwejointheChoirInvisible. Itissometimesclaimedthatmessagespurportingtocomefromaparticulardeadperson,andnot uncharacteristicofhim,arestrengthenedasevidenceofhissurvivalandidentitywhenaccompaniedby "physical"phenomena,alsopurportingtobeduetohim.Ifthemessagesarebythemselvessufficientto establishhissurvival(astowhichseethechaptersthatfollowthis),thenthe"physical"phenomena accompanyingthemaresuperfluous.Ifthemessagesdonotprovethemselves,theyarenoguaranteeofthe "physical"phenomena.Evenifthegenuinenessofthesephenomenaisestablishedonothergrounds,suchas theadequacyofthecontrolmeasuresinforceatthesitting,theirorigincannotbeprovedbycommunications whicharethemselvesofdubiousauthenticity.Notallbelieversin"physical"phenomenaacceptthespiritualistic viewofthem.Asinthecaseofmaterialisations,sowithregardtoother"physical"phenomena,alternative explanationshavethesupportofseveraleminentandexperiencedinvestigators. Ishallaccordinglyomitfurtherdiscussionof"physical"phenomenaexceptinsofarastheiroccurrencethrows lightonthepsychologicalsituationinwhichphenomenaofthesocalled"mental"typeareproduced,asitdoes inthemediumship(18721883)ofStaintonMoses.Asthiswasinseveralwaysaturningpointinthehistoryof mediumship,itmaybeaconvenientplacetoexplainsomeofthewordsthatwillbeusedtodescribethe personalities,actualorostensible,nowtobediscussedandthephenomenaconnectedwiththem.Psychical researchandspiritualismbothhavefairlylonghistoriesinthecourseofwhichtheyhaveelaborated terminologies,notalwaysmutuallyconsistent,sometimesbasedonobsoleteconceptionsofthethings intendedtobedefined,andchangingwiththecourseoftime.Whereawordhasbecomeestablishedingeneral use,ithasseemedtomebettertoretainitwithsuchchangeindefinitionasluciditymaydemand,evenatthe expenseofverbalsymmetry,ratherthantobotherthereaderwithanewtechnicaltermthatfreshresearch mightinafewyearsrenderobsolete. Thereisnoveryconvenientorexacttermingeneralusetodescribethesortofmediumwhosephenomenaare notofthe"physical"order."Mental"asappliedtopersonshasanunfortunateconnotation,andisanyhow inexact."Clairvoyant"isnolongertolerablenowthatclairvoyancehasacquiredamoreprecisedefinition:itsuse wouldonlyleadtoserious'confusion."Trancemedium"isalsoinexact,as"physical"phenomenaaregenerally producedintrance,orostensiblyso,andmoreoverwhilemany"communications"arereceivedintrance,others, especiallythosereceivedthroughautomaticwriting,arenot.Ashoweveritisshortandlessmisleadingthan "clairvoyant"itwillbeusedtocoverallformsofmediumshipinwhichcommunicationsarereceivedthatpurport tocomefromthesurvivingspiritsofthedead.Automatistsareatypeoftrancemediumwhopractiseoneonthe varioustechniquesdescribedinalaterchapter. Intheearlydaysoftrancemediumship,theviewwasprevalentthatduringtranceaspiritinvadedthemedium's bodyofwhichittookcompleteandundividedcontrol,displacingthemedium'sownspirit.Hencethe personalitieswhoclaimedtomanifestduringthetrancewerecalled"Controls".(Itisnowusualtospellthisword withacapitalCwhenappliedtoatrancepersonality,andwithasmallcwhenappliedtotheconditionprevailing whensuchapersonalityismanifesting.)Incourseoftimehoweveritbecamedesirabletodistinguishbetween (a)thespiritswhosepurposeitwastogiveevidenceoftheiridentitytotheirfriendsonearth,andmessagesof interesttothem,thesebeingcalled"Communicators",and(b)otherspiritswhomadenoseriousattemptto provetheiridentity,butconfinedthemselvestointroducingtheCommunicatorsandrelayingtheirmessagesin thethirdperson("Hesays"etc.),toarrangingthetimes,duradonandgeneralconditionsofsittings,toimparting moralexhortation,andtoexplainingthephilosophyofmediumship.Itistospiritsofthissecondkindthatthe word"Control"isnowmostlyapplied.Itremainsingeneraluseevenbypersonswhodonotacceptthe independentexistenceofControls,or,iftheyacceptit,donotregardthemedium'sownmindorspiritasbeing eliminatedbytheControl'sactivity. ThedistinctionbetweenControlandCommunicatorisnotsharplydefined.SomeCommunicatorsspeakinthe firstpersonwithouttheinterventionofaseparateControl:thisstateofthingsiscalled"directcontrol".Some, besidessendingevidentialmessagesthemselves,introduceotherCommunicators.Itmaynotbesuperfluousat thispointtoremindthereaderofwhatwassaidinChapterIIthattheomissionofqualifyingwordssuchas "ostensible"inspeakingofcontrollingorcommunicatingpersonalities,whileconvenientforthesakeofbrevity, doesnotimplyanyassertionwhethertheyare,orarenot,whattheypurportto ThemediumshipofStaintonMoseshasbeenspokenofasahistoricalturningpoint.Itmaybesoconsideredfor severalreasons.ItbeganinwhatmaybecalledtheprehistoricalperiodbeforethefoundingoftheSPRin1882 madepsychicalresearchanorganisedstudy.StaintonMoseswasanoriginalmemberoftheSociety.He producedbothphysicalandmentalphenomena.Latermediumshavespecialisedinoneortheother,there

    beingnomorerecentexampleofatrancemediumworthseriousconsiderationwhoproducednotablephysical phenomena,orofaccphysical"mediumthroughwhomcommunicationsofimportancehavebeenreceived.In hismediumshipthedistinctionbetweenControlandCommunicatorbecomesplain,aboutathirdofthefour scorespiritsmanifestingthroughhimbeingthespiritsOfpersonsrecentlydeadwhoclaimedtogiveevidenceof theirsurvivalandidentity. Aninterestingandinstructiveexampleisthemanifestationatsittingsonthe1stand2ndSeptember,1874,ofa CommunicatorwhogavethenameAbrahamFlorentine.AnextractfromStaintonMoses'snotebookfor1st September,1874,reads: "Anewspiritmanifestedbytilts.HegavehisnameasAbrahamFlorentine,andliewasinthe AmericanWarof1812,diedAugust5th1874,aged83years,1month,17days,atBrooklyn." Fromenquiriesmadeofhiswidowitwasshownthatthestatementsmadeastohisname,thedateandplace ofhisdeath,andhiswarservicewerecorrect.Astohisagethereappearedtoheatriflingmistake:hewas indeed83yearsold,butashisbirthdaywasthe8thJune,hehadlivedinaddition1monthand27days,notone monthand17.Onthewholehoweverthemessageseemedatthetimetoprovidestrikingevidenceforspirit communication.Butfurtherenquirymadein1921showedthatthemistakemightbesignificant.Anentryinthe Brook lynDailyEagleoftheeveningofthe5thAugust1874read: FLORENTINE.InBrooklyn,August5th,afteralongandpainfulillness,ABRAHAMFLORENTINE aged83years,1monthand17days.Aveteranofthewarof1812.Noticeoffuneralhereafter. TheNewYork DailyTribuneofthe6thAugust1874printedanalmostidenticalnotice,withthesamestatement astohisage.Itistobenotedthat,thoughneitherStaintonMoses'scontemporaryrecordnorMrs.Speer's accountofthesittingsayanythingastothelengthofAbrahamFlorentine'sillnessorwhetheritwaspainful, StaintonMosesinalettertotheSpiritualistspeaksof"hisliberationfromthebodywhich(ifImayguessagain) hadbecomeaburdentohimfromapainfulillness".Thisfactsupportstheinferencesuggestedbythe correspondencebetweenthenewspapernoticesandtherecordofthesitting,especiallywherebothwere incorrect,thatthesourceoftheinformationgivenatthesittingwasoneofthenewspapers. Ifso,howhaditcometoStaintonMoses'sconscious,orsubconscious,mind?Enthusiastsforanindefinite extensionofextrasensoryperceptionmightattributeittodirectclairvoyance,orpossiblytotelepathybetween thecompositorinAmericaandStaintonMoses.IfhoweveritwaspossibleforhimtohavereadtheObituaryin eitherpaper,itwouldbesimplertoassumethathehadinfactreadit.Therewastimeforthenewspapersto reachLondon,wherehelived,beforethesitting,butthereisnoevidencethatheactuallysawthem,anditmay appearcuriousthatifhehaddonesoheshouldhaveforgottenitwithinafewdays.Therebeingnogroundfor imputingconsciousdeceptiontohim,itmustbesupposedthatthenewspaperentryattractedacasualglance ("marginalperception"istheterm),makingnoimpressiononhisconsciousmemory,butproducingalatent subconsciousmemorythatwasactivatedbytheconditionsofthesitting.Thepossibilityofmarginalperception withconsequentlatentmemoryisthemostseriousdifficultytobefacedwhenassessingrecordsofsittingswith trancemediums.ForthisimportantcaseseeSPRProceedings XI,8285andJournalXX148152,223226. ForthepresentpurposehoweveragreaterinterestattachestotheControlswhogavenoevidenceofidentity thatneedbeconsidered.ItisofcourseconceivablethattheEgyptianChom,nototherwiseknowntofame,or theprophetHaggai,orPlotinus,orBeethovenorBenjaminFranklin,tonamebutafewofthisgroup,mighthave givenStaintonMosesinformationaboutthemselveswhichcouldbeshowntobetrueandwhichcouldbeshown atthesametimenottohaveformedpartofhisextensivescholarlyknowledge,butsofarasIknowthisdidnot happen. WithinthisgrouptheleadwastakenbyabandofspiritswhoassumeddescriptiveLatinnamessuchas "ImperatorServusDei","Rector","Prudens",etc.,toconcealtheiridentitiesfromtheworldatlarge.Thenames theyhadborneonearthwererevealedtoStaintonMoses,butnotmadepublicduringhislifeorforsometime after.TheyincludedcharactersfromtheOldandNewTestaments,andlearnedmenofvariousperiodsand countries. ThemostanomalousoftheControlswas"LittleDicky",achildspirit,whoononeoccasionduringasanceis reportedtohavebroughtabrasscandlestickfromanotherroomandhitthemediumovertheheadwithit.Itis notunnaturalthattomanyofthemedium'scontemporaries,whoknewStaintonMosestobeinordinarylifea sincereandconscientiousman,suchanassaultshouldseem,howeverplayfullyintended,conclusiveproofthat

    "LittleDicky"wasapersonalityquiteseparatefromhisvictim.Toalatergenerationfamiliarwithrecordsof poltergeistcasesandthestoryofSallyBeauchamp,thisisnotatallsoobvious.Comparisonwiththem suggestsexactlytheopposite,that"LittleDicky"wasadramatisationofoneaspectofthemedium's subconscious,andthatitisnotunlikelythatotheraspectsweredramatisedbyotherofhisControls. Thissuggestionwouldnotdeservetocarrymuchweightintileabsenceofreasonablemotivesforsoelaboratea mystification.Subconsciousmotivesofcourse,becauseasregardshisconsciousmindthereisnodoubtthat StaintonMosessincerelybelievedintheindependentrealityoftheControls.Theprimaryconsiderationwas,I think,thatonlythroughtheControlscouldheeffectivelyfulfilhismissionofgivingtotheworldthephilosophy embodiedinthe"SpiritTeachings"dictatedbythem.Theyprovidedamultiplealiasfortheexpressionofviews formedbyhimovermanyyears,whichitwouldhavebeenimpossibletoreconcilewiththedoctrinesofthe ChurchofEnglandofwhichhewasapriest,thoughhenolongerhadacureofsouls.Moreovertheseopinions weremorelikelytoimpresstheworldifissuedoverthenamesofahostofsaintsandsagesthantheywould havedoneifhehadclaimedto,betheirauthor. Asecondarymotivemayhavebeenthatinthecompanyofthesaintsandsagesheobtainedwelcomerelief fromthedullroutineofaschoolmaster'slife,diversifiedotherwiseonlybyfrequentboutsofillness.Perhaps "LittleDicky"wasarelieffromtoomanysaintsandsages. ThemediumshipofMrs.Piper,themostfamousoftrancemediums,beganin1884,theyearfollowingtheclose ofStaintonMoses'sactivity.Shelivedtoagreatage,dyingin1950,butdoesnotseemtohaveproduced anythingofimportanceafter1915.Duringthewholeofheractivemediumshipshewasundertheclose investigationofcriticalandcompetentresearchers.Shewillinglycollaboratedwiththem,andtheywereall agreedthatshewasperfectlyhonest,andthatthecommunicationsreceivedthroughherconveyedinformation outsidehernormallyacquiredknowledge.Ontwopointshowevertherewasdisagreement,whetheranyofher Controlsexistedindependentlyofher,andwhetheranyofthecommunicationsshouldbetakenaswhatthey claimedtobe,messagesfromparticulardeadpersons.Thelatterpointwillbediscussedinanotherchapter, andallthatneedforthepresentbesaidisthatthroughMrs.Pipertherewasforthe,firsttimeobtaineda substantialbodyofevidenceonwhichsuchaclaimcouldwithanyshowofreasonbebased. Mrs.Piper'smediumshipmaybedividedintofiveperiods,inthefirstfourofwhichhercommunicationswere producedintrance,whileinthefifthshepractisedautomaticwritingwithouttrance.Thefirstperiodbeganwhen, anhersecondvisittoahealingmediumnamedCockeforrelieffromtheeffectsofanaccident,sheherselfwent intotrance.ThemainControlduringthisperiod,whichlasteduntil1892,wasPhinuitwhoclaimedtohavebeen aFrenchdoctor.CockehadadoctorControlcalledFinney,andMrs.Piper'sPhinuit(thespellingisduetothe sitterwhorecordedhertrance)obviouslyowedhisnameandhisselfattributeddoctorshiptoCocke'sControl. PhinuithadonlyasmatteringofFrenchandnosystematicknowledgeofmedicine,andhemadecontradictory statementsastohisbirthplace.Butheseemstohaveshownsomeflairfordiagnosisandheimpressedhis investigatorsasapersonalitywho,whateverhisownpsychologicalstatus,shouldbetakenseriously.Hewas thedominantControlduringMrs.Piper'sfirstvisittoEnglandin18891890,whenshewasinvestigatedbyavery ableSPRCommitteeconsistingofMyers,LodgeandWalterLeaf.Hislastappearancewasin1897.In1892a youngmannamedPellew(calledintherecordsGeorgePelham.orG.P.)diedsuddenlyinAmerica,wherehe hadbeenwellknowntoHodgson,Mrs.Piper'sprincipalinvestigator.Atasittingafewweeksafterhisdeath,at whichPhinuitwasControl,G.P.appearedasCommunicatorandgavetheanonymoussittercorrectinformation. LaterheactedasControl,frequentlyuntil1896,andmorerarelyafterthat. ThethirdperiodmaybeconsideredasextendingfromJanuary1897toHodgson'ssuddendeathinDecember 1905.ThemainControlatthistimewasRector,whowasintroducedbyaControlcallinghimselfStainton MosesasaformermemberofhisImperatorgroup.ThenametowhichtheMosesRectorlaidclaimhadnotat thistimebeenmadepublic:itwasinfactSt.Hippolytus.ThePiperRectorfailedtoestablishhisidentitywith theMosesRector,beingunabletogivethisname,orindeedtogiveproofsofbeinganypersonwhohadever lived.Hewasnonetheless,onthetestimonyofseveralsitters,distinctlyimpressive,andwasregardedby WilliamJamesashavinga"Capacityforbeingaspiritualadvise?'superiortothatofMrs.Piperinthestateof ordinaryconsciousness.HecontinuedasmainControlafterHodgson'sdeathandactedassuchduringthe fourthperiodofthemediumship. WiththechangesinControlswasassociatedachangeintheConditioninwhichMrs.Pipergavemessages.In thefirstperiodthemessageswereentirelyoral,deliveredintrance.Inthesecondtheyweremainlyoral,with somewriting,deliveredintranceineithercase.Duringtheseperiodsentryintotrancewaspainful,butwiththe adventofRectoritbecamemucheasier.Themessagesweregivenduringthis,thethirdperiod,inwritingwhile

    thetrancelasted,thewholebodyofthemedium,exceptthehandthatwrote,appearinginert.Thesame conditionsprevailedduringthefourthperiod,whichlasteduntil1911,whenherImperatorControl"closedthe light".Therefollowedafifthperiodwhenshewroteautomaticallybutnotintrance. InadditiontotheprincipalControlsnamed,thePipermediumshiphadahostofminorones.Therewas,for instance,aMentorwhoassertedhisidentitywiththeStaintonMosesControlofthesamename.Thelatter claimedtobeAlgazzali,aneleventhcenturyArabphilosopher.ButthePiperMentoravowedhimselftobethe classicalUlysses,not,onewouldsay,apersonpreeminentlyfittedtoserveasaspiritualguide.Therewasa SirWalterScottwhodeclaredthereweremonkeysinthesun,andaGeorgeEliotwhohadmetAdamBedein heaven.Theseareobviousabsurdities,notworthfurtherdiscussionwereitnotthattheirappearanceraises doubtsastothescopeoffantasyinhermediumshipasawhole,andsocastsdoubtsontheclaimstoan independentexistencemadebytheprincipalControls,Phinuit,G.P.,andRector. NoneofthesethreecansoreadilybedismissedasfigmentsofMrs.Piper'ssubconscious.Theirstatuswas debatedatgreatlengthandwithmuchabilityonbothsidesinSPRProceedings .Infavouroftheirindependence thereareseveralpointsdeservingconsideration,butnoneinmyviewconclusive.Firstthereistheintegrityof Mrs.Piper'sconsciousmind,whichisadmitted,butisnotinconsistentwithelaboratedramatisationinthe subconscious,examplesofwhichhavebeengiveninChapterVII.Thenthereisthefact,acceptedbycritical investigators,thatthoughneitherPhinuitnorRectorcouldprovetheiridentity,eachinhiswayseemedto surpassMrs.Piper'snormalpowers.HereagainChapterVIIshouldbetakenintoaccount. Theotherpointsrelatetotheveridicalnatureofthecommunicationsmadebyallofthem.Inparticulara plausible,butnotinmyviewconclusive,casecouldbemadeoutforregardingG.P.'sapparentsuccessasa Communicator,whichwillbediscussedinalaterchapter,asguaranteeinghisindependenceasaControl. TodefinethestatusofthePiperControlsisamatterofgreatpsychologicalinterest,butdoesnotveryclosely concernthequestionofsurvival,sincewhateverviewbetakenastotheirindependencenoactionoftheirsisas relevanttothatquestionasthecommunicationsobtainedthroughthesamemedium.Thesameistrueofthe Controlsofothertrancemediumsandthemessagesreceivedthroughthem. ItishoweverofinteresttonotethattheoddphenomenonofMrs.Piper'shandactingasifitbyitself,andit alone,possessedintelligence,hasaparallelinthecaseofAnnaWinsor,(18601863:seeH.P.I.354360).Not indeedacompleteparallel,asAnnaWinsorrepresented"anextremeformofhysteroepilepsy"whileMrs.Piper, thoughofteningreatphysicalpain,wasnotablyplacidintemperament.AnnaWinsor,whocalledherrightarm andhand"OldStump",regardedthemassomethingintelligentbutforeign,asMrs.Piper'srighthandgavethe appearanceofbeing.ButtherewasinMrs.Piper'scasenosuchshowofhostilitybetweenthehandandthe restoftheorganismaswasrecordedwithAnnaWinsor. AttheendofhersittingsMrs.Piperseveraltimesspokeof"slidingdown"acordintothebody,orofbeing pulledbackbyone,andshealsoexpresseddisgustatfindingherselfbackinnormallife,inawayrecallingthe feelingsofthepercipientin"outofthebody"experiences.Whileinhospital,afteranoperationitseems,she hadawelldevelopedexperienceofthistype,whichshestyles"adreamorvision".TwoofherControls,Phinuit andG.P.,appearedtoher.Sheheardvoicessaying"Come,wewishtotakeyouwithus:wewishtogiveyoua restfromyourtiredbody".Afterapauseshefeltshewasbeingliftedandwasnotonherbed.Shepassed throughadelicatebluedrapery,and"sawalightasthoughallspacethewholeearthwasaglowsuchalight!I neversawanythinglikeitbefore".Shewasgreetedbysinging,andaringofbeautifulwomendancing,passed betweenhedgeswithflowers,andcametoapillaredbuildingwhereshemetseveraldeadrelationsand Communicators.Shefeltastabinthebackwhereshewasattachedtoacordthatlookedliketherayoflight whichshehadfollowedinherascent.Shewaspulledbacktoherbodyandfoundherselfawake."Mybody seemedsodarkandheavyasthoughitdidnotbelongtome:Ihadtostruggleforbreath.Ifeltdepressedto thinkthatIhadgotback."(Proc .XXVIII,377380). TheanalogybetweensomeaspectsofthePipermediumshipandconditionsunassociatedwithmediumship describedinearlierchaptersisobvious.ButinconsideringthenatureofmediumisticControlsoneisnotentirely confinedtoargumentfromanalogy.Moredirectpsychologicalmethodshavebeenbroughttobearonthe Controlsofsomerecentmediums,suchasMrs.LeonardandMrs.Garrett.Mrs.Leonard'sonlyControl,apart fromCommunicatorControls,isthechildFeda,whoinsomeways,butnotaltogether,closelyresembles secondarypersonalitiesoftheSallytype.Feda,likeSally,ismostamusing,andprofessesacontemptforher medium,notunlikethatwhichSallyboastedtohaveforMissBeauchamp,orMargaretforDorisFischer.But whereasbothSallyandMargaretwereguiltyofspitefulactions,FedahasnevergonebeyondcausingMrs.

    Leonardsuchembarrassmentsasprevailingonhertogiveanexpensivepresentortowalkthroughthestreets ofatowntrailingatoyballoon.Fedaismoreover,ontheuniversaltestimonyofMrs.Leonard'ssitters, absolutelystraightforward.ForacharactersketchofherseeSPRProceedings XXXII,344378. In1933WhatelyCaringtonbegantoapplytoMrs.LeonardandMrs.Garrett,bothofwhomcollaboratedmost willingly,theestablishedpsychologicaltechniqueofwordassociationtests.Themethodistoreadtoasubject listsofstimuluswordstowhichthesubjectreplieswiththefirstwordshethinksof.Thesubject'sreactions,e.g. thetimebetweenstimulusandresponse,arenotedandonexaminationarefoundtoshowapattern characteristicofeachsubject. Caringtonadministeredthistestfirsttoeachofthesemediumsintheirnormalstate,andthen,usingthesame stimuluslisttoeachofthemintrance.Theanalysisoftheresultsledtoalongtechnicaldiscussioninseveral volumesofSPRProceedings .Carington'sconclusion,whichwasnothoweveracceptedbyallMrs.Leonard's sitters,wasthatFedawasasecondarypersonality,probablyformedroundanucleusofmaterialrepressedby themedium'sconsciousmind. WithMrs.Garrettrecoursehasalsobeenhadtotheelectroencephalograph,bywhichtheelectricalactivityof thecerebralcortexisrecordedonamovingpaperstrip,therecordbeingknownasanelectroencephalogram.or E.E.G.Thepurposewastodiscoverwhethermediumistictrancecouldbeshowntohavefeaturesdistinguishing itfromthenormal("alpha")rhythmobservedwithsubjectsrestingbutawake,andfromtherhythmobservedin hypnosis,inhystericaldissociation,andinlightanddeepsleep.TheinstrumentwasattachedtoMrs.Garrett's headattwosessionsin1951,firstwhenshewasawakebutresting,andthenwhileshewentinto,remainedin, andcameoutoftrance,duringwhichtimeherControl,Uvani,spoke.Trancewasatthesecondsessioninduced byhypnosis.TheSPRJournal(XXXVI,588596)reports,"TherewasnosignificantE.E.G.changewhenthe subjectwentintoorcameoutofeitherthetrancestateorthehypnoticstate". E.E.G.tests,andotherphysiologicaltests,haveabearingonthestatusofControlsonlyifitbeavalid assumptionthatthecorrelationbetweenmentalprocessesandbodilyconditionsisconstant,whetherthe mentalprocessesmanifestthemselvesinnormalorparanormalactivities.Thishasyettobeproved,andindeed suchevidenceasisavailablesuggeststhatintelepathymentalactivitymayoccurwithoutacorresponding physicalstimulus,aconceptionwhichmanyscientistsfinddifficultyinacceptingnotwithstandingtheimpressive massofevidenceinitsfavour.Inthepresentstateofknowledgethereforephysiologicaltests,whethertheygive positiveor,asintheE.E.G.testdescribedabove,negativeresults,arenotconclusivefororagainstthe independenceofControls. Inthelatterpartofthisbookmuchwillbesaidaboutthe"SPRgroupofautomatists",whosecontribution towardsasolutionoftheproblemofsurvivalisgenerallyagreedtobeoutstanding.Adiscussionofthebearing onthisproblemofthestatusofControlswouldheincompletewithoutconsiderationoftheparttheyplayinthe scriptsofthisgroup,whichrepresenteachofthemembersofthegroupasbeingintouchwithanothergroup consistingofCommunicators,allidentifiableeitherbytheirnamesorinotherways.Ofthefiveprincipal membersofthegroupofautomatistsnonehadaControlwhowasnotalsoaCommunicator,i.e.whodidnot givemessagespurportingtobeevidential.WithsomeoftheautomatiststheCommunicatorshardlyemerged fromanimpersonalcollectivity,themessagesbeingintroducedwithsomesuchphraseas"theysay".With othersaCommunicatorwouldtakeonforatimeanotverystronglymarkedindividuality,andwithone,Mrs. Willett,theControlCommunicatorstookonmarkedpersonalcharacteristicsofspeechandmanner.Inthe "crosscorrespondences"whichwereanimportantfeatureofthesescripts,thescriptsoftwoormore automatistsofthegrouphadtobereadtogethertogetatthemeaning.Forthispurposethedegreeof personalisationshownbytheControlCommunicatorsofthevariousautomatistscountedfornothing.The evidencethereforeoftheautomaticwritingsoftheSPRgroupdoesnotruncountertotheviewformedfroma surveyoftrancemediumshipingeneralthatthecaseforsurvivalisnotstrengthenedbytheverydoubtfulclaims toindependentexistencemadebyControls,sofarastheycanbedifferentiatedfromCommunicators.

    Chapter10:CommunicationsThroughMediums I:AsaffectedThroughNormalMeans
    W.H.Salter THEUSEofthecumbrousdoubleword"ControlCommunicator"inthelastchapterillustratesthe difficultyofdefiningpreciselywhatismeantbya"communication".Messagesofcomfortandexhortation maybecloselycombinedinmediumisticutterancewithothermessageswhich,iftakenattheirfacevalue, suggestthesurvivalandidentityofsomespecificperson.Theremainderofthisbookwillbedevotedtoa considerationofhowfarthislattertypeofmaterialcanbereasonablyattributedtonormalcauses,as discussedinthischapter,or,failingthat,totheoperationoftheparanormalfacultiesoflivingpersons.If neitherofthesecausesfullyaccountsfortheevidence,itwouldfollowthatunlesssometranscendental factorunverifiablebyordinaryenquiryhasintervened,theapparentindicationsofsurvivalarenotwholly illusorybutpointtosomeunderlyingreality.Ifso,canthenatureofthisrealitybeascertained? ToillustratetheargumentIshalldrawonmyownexperience,andstillmoreonthatofmywifeandher family.WhilethecommunicationsIhavemyselfreceivedareofnoexceptionalimportance,andarecited heresimplybecausetheyhaveinmymindbecomeattachedtovariouspointsthatwillneeddiscussion,no surveyofthisproblemwouldapproachcompletenessthatfailedtogiveprominencetothepartsplayedinit byA.W.Verrall,classicalscholarandProfessorofEnglishLiteratureatCambridge,hiswife,andtheir daughter,Helen,whomImarried.Thatthisisnotaprivatefadofmyowncanbeshownbythevery numerouspapersinSPRProceedings fromVol.XX(1906)on,inwhichoneorotherofthemfiguresas experimenter,automatist,Communicatororsitter.Verralldiedin1912Mrs.Verrallin1916mywife(whom forbrevityIwillcallH.V.)ceasedtobeactiveasanautomatistorsitterabouttwentyfiveyearsago.This lapseoftimejustifiesme,Ithink,inclaimingfreedomfromsuchpersonalbias,ifany,asIeverhadin estimatingthevalueoftheircontributiontowardsthesolutionofthisproblem.Howeachofthemcomesinto thestorywillappearasthisdiscussionproceeds. Automatistsarenotessentiallyadifferenttypeofpersonfrommediums.Itishoweverconvenienttogive themadifferentname.Bymediumsaregenerallymeantpersonswhomakearegularpracticeofemploying theirpsychicpowers,whetherpro.fessionallyornot.Theautomatist,ontheotherhand,isonewhomakes useofthesepowersoccasionally,andveryoftenspontaneously.Automatistsalsoingeneralgointoa lighterstateofdissociationthanregularmediums.Infactmuchautomaticspeechandwritingisofthe "inspirational"typeandproducedinastateveryslightlyremovedfromnormalconsciousness.Theuseof devicessuchasplanchetteorouijaboardismorefrequentwithautomatiststhanwithregularmediums,and theemergenceofwelldevelopedControlsrarer.Thedistinctionhoweverbetweenthetwoisnotclearcut, norisitfundamental.G.W.Balfour,whenanalysingthepsychologyofMrs.Willett,afamousmemberof "theSPRgroupofautomatists",speaksofher"mediumship":(SPRProc .XLIII). Toreturnfromthisparenthesistomediumisticcommunicationsandtheirbearingonthequestionofsurvival, Iwillfirstconsidermessagespurportingtoconveyinformationthatwaswithintheknowledgeofthe Communicatorwhenalive,butliesoutsidetheconsciousknowledgeofthemedium.Thefirstquestionhere iswhetheritisknowledgeofverifiablefacts.Messagesforexampleoftendescribetheconditionsinwhich theCommunicatorfindshimselfafterbodilydeath.Ifanytestoftheirtruthistobeapplied,itmustbea transcendentalonelyingoutsidetheprovinceofpsychicalresearch.Sofarasmoreordinarystandardsof judgmentareapplicable,allowancemusthemadeforconventionalideasofafuturelifederivedfromthe complexinteractionofoutofthebodyexperiences,literarytraditionasexemplifiedintheFrogs ,theSixth AeneidandtheDivinaCommedia,andthesystematicteachingofreligiousbodies.Wherethedescriptions comethroughaprofessionalmedium,accountmustalsobetakenoftheextenttowhichspiritualism,long establishedasaregularcultpursuedwithgreatardour,hasbothadoptedandmodifiedtheseconventional ideas.Ifevidenceofsurvivalistobesoughtfromverifiablestatementsoffact,itmustbesoughtelsewhere. Andofcourseverifiablestatementsaboundinmediumisticutterances.Butofthosethataretruehowmany areluckyshots?Howmanycanbeassignedtothemedium'snormallyacquiredknowledge?Mediumsare membersofanhonourableprofession,buttheyworkunderconditionsthataxeatemptationtodevious practices.Theyhavetogivesittings,atprearrangeddateswhich,whentheyfalldue,maynotfindthemina moodthatpromisessuccess.Thesittermaybebynatureuncongenial,orhimselfinadifficultmood.No

    memberofaprofessionlikestofalldownonthejob,andthesubconscious,activeduringtrance,hasa particulardislikeofacknowledgingdefeat.Itlooksforaneasywayoutandfindsthereisachoiceofseveral. Thecoursewhichputstheleaststrainonitistodescribetheotherworld,thenatureofthe"astral"or "etheric"body,andthemechanismofcommunicationbywhateverformulaisatthetimeprevalentinthe spiritualistmovement.Themediummay,andverylikelywill,sincerelybelievethesedescriptions. Asitterwhodoesnotcaretowastehistimeorhisguineasinlisteningtoamediumsaywhathecan,ifhe sowishes,readforhimselfanydayinthespiritualistpressinthecomfortofhishomeandatthecostofa fewpence,willpolitelybutfirmlydirectthecommunicationsintootherchannels.Butmuchmaybelearnt fromamediumwhocandescribetheprocessofcommunicationashefeelsit,withoutrecoursetostock phrasesmuchalsofromtheuseinonemeaningofwordstheusualandestablishedmeaningofwhichis different.G.W.BalfourinhisimportantstudyofMrs.Willett'spsychology,pointsoutthat,thoughshewas familiarwithMyers'swritingsonthe"subliminal",anduseshislanguagetodescribehersensations,she givesanaccountoftherelationsbetween"subliminal"and"supraliminal"(approximatelyequivalentto subconsciousandconsciousasIusethosewords)thatdifferswidelyfromhis,therebythrowinglightonher ownpsychicprocesses. Thesitterwhoisdissatisfiedwithvaguetalkandwishesforverifiablefactsmayreceivestringsofcommon Christiannames,thrownouttentatively.Ifheshowsinterestinanyofthem,suchremarksasthesemaybe added:"Therehasbeenabirthdayinthefamilylately."(Thesitter,wewillsuppose,doesnotrespond.)"Or perhapshe"(i.e.theCommunicator)"meansitiscomingsoon."Givenawidemeaningtoeachofthewords "family","lately",and"soon",thesesentenceswouldatanytimefitalargepartofthepopulation.Ifthe sitterrisestoanyitem,itmaybeusedasbaitformoreextensive"fishing". Alargenumberofrandomshotswillalmostcertainlyproducesomehits,andifanyofthesehappentolight onaspotwherethesitterisemotionallysensitive,hemaybedeeplyimpressed.Inthatcasehewoulddo welltoaskafewofhisfriendstolookthroughtherecords,andtotellhimhowfarthecommunicationsfit theirowncircumstances.Thiswillgivehimaroughandreadyguideastotheextenttowhichthe successesmaybeassignedtochance.Ifhewantsamorepreciseassessment,hecanapplyoneofthe variousformulaethathavebeenworkedoutforthestatisticalevaluationofsittings.Ihaveyethoweverto meetanyexperiencedsitterwhohasfoundthistechniquesatisfactoryinpractice,exceptasameansof showingupthepovertyofsittingsthatanyemotionallyunbiasedpersonofintelligencewouldatthefirst glancerecogniseaspoor. Itisafrequentcriticismofqualitativematerialinpsychicalresearch,whetherspontaneousinoriginsuchas apparitions,experimentalaswherethetargetsare"free",ormediumistic,thatthereisnocertaintyastothe extenttowhichchancehasaffectedtheresults.Thisisafaircriticismofagreatdealofthematerial reportedtotheSPR,andofsomeofthematerialpublishedbyit.Itisawasteoftimeattemptingtodecide howmuchofthisequivocalmaterialfallsononesideofthedividinglinebetweenchanceandnonchance, andhowmuchontheother,sincethereisonrecordalargermassthanthemostdiligentstudentcould masterofqualitativematerial,spontaneous,experimentalandmediumistic,thatcouldonlybeassignedto chancebyaludicrousstrainingofprobability.Alltherestcansimplybedisregarded.Andofcoursematerial thatsuccessfullypassesthetestofchance,hasstillotherteststomeetbeforeitcanbeacceptedas paranormal.Atoofreeresponseto"fishing"isnottheonlywayinwhichasittermayconveytoamedium informationwhichmaylaterreappearinacommunicationtohimselfortosomeothersitter.Itisfitand properthatasittershouldwishtobeoninformal,friendlytermswiththemedium,butthisdesiremaylead togossipychattingbeforeorafterthesitting,whilethemediumisinafullyconsciousstate.Goodmediums intenselydislikehavingunsoughtconfidencesthrustuponthemwheninastateofordinaryconsciousness. Ifanyoftheinformationsoimpartedcomesoutlaterinatrancecommunication,doubtsmaybethrownon thegenuinenessofthetrance.Ontheotherhandanticipationofsuchapossibleconsequencemayinhibit theflowofcommunication.Ineithereventthemediumhasbeenputinanunfairposition. Therearemoreoverotherways,besidesincautiouschatter,ofconveyingusefulinformation.Someyears agoasittingwasbookedwithawellknownmediumforananonymoussitter.Tothemedium'sgreat annoyancethesitterarrivedindeepwidow'sweeds,wearingabroochwithacoronetandtheinitialsofa manoftitlewhosesuddendeathhadnotlongbeforereceivedgreatnewspaperpublicity.Thisreducedthe anonymitytoafarce.Buttheanonymoussittercannotalwayshelprevealinghisidentity.ThuswhenWalter Prince,whohasalreadybeenmentioned,paidashortvisittoEnglandwhichwasannouncedinthepsychic press,hebookedananonymoussittingwithMrs.Leonard.Withtypicalcandourshesaidtohim,"Ithink youareDr.Prince.""My!Howdidyouguessthat?""IknewyouwereinEnglandandthoughtyouwould

    probablyaskforasittingwithme.Iknewabouthowoldyouareandyourvoicetoldmeyouwerefromthe States."Princehadanaccentofthepungencyofwhichhewasquiteunaware. Asitter'sagemaybyitselfmisleadafishingmedium.Iwaswellpastmiddleagebeforeeitherofmyparents died.Forsomeyearsbeforethatafewmediumsjudgedmetobeamanlikelytohaveafatherand/or motherinthespiritworldandgavememessagesofcomfortappropriatetomysupposedstateof bereavement. "Goodsittersmakegoodmediums."Thatputsagoodpointtoobluntly,fornoamountofskillorpatienceor tactonthesitter'spartwillmakeupfortheabsenceorweaknessofamedium'sparanormalpowers.Butit isthefactthatnosmallshareofthecreditforthelongandsuccessfulcareersasmediumsofMrs.Piper andMrs.LeonardisduetotheSPRinvestigatorswhofromtheearlydaysoftheirmediumshipcombined personalfriendlinesswithasharpeyeforevidence.Inreturnbothoftheemediumseagerlycollaboratedwith theSPRinplanningandconductingexperimentsdesignedtoextendknowledgeofpsychicprocesses.Bad sittersontheotherhandmusttakealargeshareoftheblameforthelesssatisfactoryfeaturesof mediumship.Muchashedisliked"Mr.Sludge"(i.e.D.D.Home),BrowningevidentlyagreedthatSludge's complaintonthisscorewaswellfounded. Instanceshavealreadybeengivenofthetooinformativesitter.Butunduereticencemaybeequally detrimental.Asitterwhomaintainsafrigidsilencethroughoutthesittingislikelytocomeawaywithlittleto showforit.Forsuccesshemustacquiretheart,whichcomeseasilywithpractice,ofencouragingthe mediumatappropriatemomentswithoutgivingawayfacts.Themaindifficultyisinextemporising sufficientlyneutralresponsestoremarksbytheControlorCommunicatorwhichcomeneartobeing questionsandwouldinanordinarytalkbetweenfriendsmeetwithfrankreplies. Fewpersonsinterestedinthesurvivalquestionarelikelytohaveasufficientnumberofsittingswithtrance mediumsofhighqualitytoprovideoutoftheirownexperiencematerialonwhichtoformajudgment.This hasalwaysbeentrueandnevermorethanatthepresenttime.Afewyearsago,whenMrs.Leonardhad restrictedheractivityasamedium,anexhaustivesearchwasmadeinGreatBritainforothertrance mediumsworthintensivestudy,withdisappointingresults.ReportsfromAmericaindicatethatthingsareno betterthere.FortunatelythereisintheProceedings oftheSPRanalmostembarrassingwealthofmaterial, onwhichthestudentcanrely.Mostofitwascollectedbeforetaperecordingofsittingswasintroduced,and thereforefailstogivecompleteinformationastowhetherthemediumattemptedto"fish",andifsotowhat extentandwithwhatsuccess,orastowhetherthesitterwastooexpansive,ornotexpansiveenough.It mayhoweverbetakenforgrantedthatthesitterswereinthemainfriendlybutdiscreet,casuallapsesbeing candidlynotedthatthenotetakers,whetherthemselvessittersornot,madeafairrecordofwhatpassed betweenmediumandsitterandthattheannotations,showingthedegreeofsuccessorfailureateachpoint ofthesitting,weretheresultofcarefulenquiry.Itaddstothevalueofthereportsthattheirauthorswerefar fromunanimousintheirviewsoftrancemediumship. "Fishing"and"fluking"arepracticestoberegrettedbecausetheywastethetime(andmoney)ofthesitter, maydiscourageasitterfromfurtherenquiry,andprovideafacilepretextforthedepreciationofmediumship andofpsychicalresearch.Beforehoweveranyonepassesatoocensoriousjudgmentonthemedium,let himexaminehisownsubconsciousinthelightofhiseverydayexperience.Hewantsperhapstoremember somenamewhichhascompletelyescapedhisconsciousmemory.Hissubconsciousrummagesaround, andoffershisconsciousmindonenameafteranother,allwrongandsomeofthemfantastic,beforefinally,if hisluckisin,fetchingupanamewhichtheconsciousmindwillacceptasthatreallyneeded. Muchthesamethinghappenstoexperimenterswiththeplanchetteorouijaboard,whentheygetthrough thesedevicesincorrect,itmaybeabsurdlyincorrect,answerstotheirquestions.Intheconditionsinwhich suchexperimentsareusuallyconducted,thereisobviouslynodeliberateintentiontodeceive.Infulltrance thesubconsciousenjoysgreaterlibertyandisevenlesswillingtoadmitdefeat.Itisnoslurontheintegrity ofatrancemediumif,havingnothingparanormalinstock,hehandsouttoanexpectantsitteranythinglying readyinhissubconscious."Fishing"isafurtherstep,asmallstep,inthewrongdirection. Allthismayproperlybedescribedas"trancedeception"andnotasconsciousfraud.Butthemilderphrase issometimesusedtocoveractionsthatarethoroughlyfraudulent,suchastheferretingoutofinformation aboutasitter,hisfamilycircleandinterestsinordertoprovidematerialwhichcouldbeworkedupinto "communications".Sitterswhohaveestablishedfriendlyrelationswithtrancemediumsarefromtimeto timetoldbythemthattheyhavebeenpresentwhenothermediumshavepooledinformationaboutsitters.

    Theyreportremarkssuchasthis:"Mrs.Joneswhosatwithyoulastweekhasbookedasittingwithmefor nextweek.Whatsortofcommunicationdoesshewant?Isitherhusbandorhersonshewantsmessages from?"Andsoon.NotlongagoIhappenedtomentiontoatrancemediumthatanoldcaseseemedtome toshowinternalevidenceofcollusionbetweentwoothermediums."Quiteright",shesaid,"oneofthem askedmetojoinin."Itisalsopossiblethatmediumsmay"mugup"frombiographiesandbooksof referencefactsastoasitterorhisfriendsthatmaycomeinusefullater. Howfartherotextendsitwouldbeimpossibletosay.Afewblacksheepdonotdiscreditawhole profession.Thetrance.mediumswhohavebeenmostintensivelystudiedbytheSPRareMrs.Piperand Mrs.Leonard,anditisonrecordsofsittingswiththemthatIshallmainlydraw.Thereneverwasanyground forsuspectingthegoodfaithofeither,butbywayofsuperlativecautioneachwasatanearlystageofher careersubjectedtoprivateenquiry,fromwhicheachofthememergedwithflyingcolours.Ishouldnot howeverwishittobesupposedthat,becausethesearethemediumsmostfrequentlyquotedbyme,there arenotothermediumsofequalintegrity.Ithasbeennecessarymorethanonceintheforegoingpagesto discussthefraudulentsimulationofpsychicphenomena.Wehereleavebehindusthatunsavourytopic, "escapedtheStygianPoolthoughlongdetained".InnoneofthematerialIshallfromnowquotedoIbelieve fraudtohaveplayedapart,andIshallnotwastetimediscussingitasaserioushypothesis. RichardHodgson,whohadformanyyearssupervisedtheAmericansittingsgivenbyMrs.Piper,diedin 1905.Hewasabachelorandwasgenerallybelievedbyhisintimatefriendsnevertohavecontemplated marriagewhilelivinginAmerica.ButatsittingswithMrs.Piperinthespringof1906(1)theHodgsonControl statedthathehadmetaladyinChicagotowhomhehadproposedmarriage,butthatshehadrefusedhim. Hermaidenname("MissDensmore"inthereport)wasgiventogetherwithhertwoChristiannames.These enabledWilliamJames,notwithstandingamistakeinthemiddlename,toidentifyherasanold acquaintanceofhis.Hedidnotknowthatsheand.Hodgsonhadevenknowneachother,butsheconfirmed tohimthestatementastoHodgson'sproposal.HemadeenquiriesamongotherintimatefriendsofHodgson astothenamesofwomentowhomtheythoughthemighthaveproposed,andnoneofthemsuggested MissDensmore.Sheseemednottohavespokenoftheproposaltoanyonebuthersister.Theincident, therefore,asJamessaidinhisreportontheHodgsonControl(SPRProc .XXIII2025),was "anexcellentonetocountinfavourofspiritreturn,unlessindeeditshouldturnoutthatwhile itwashappening,he(Hodgson)hadbeenledtoconsultthePiperControlsaboutithimself."
    (1)Owingtomisprints,thedateofthesesittingsisgivenintheSPRreport,Proc.XXIII,as1905.

    InJune1906anotheroldfriendofHodgsn,ProfessorW.R.Newbold,hadasittingwithMrs.Piperatwhich theHodgsonControlaskedhimwhetherheremembered"MissDensmore".Newboldrepliedthathebegan toremember:wasitabouteightornineyearsago?TothistheControlassented.Onlookinguphis correspondencewithHodgson,Newboldfoundthatin1895thePiperControlshadprophesiedthatbothhe andHodgsonwouldsoonbehappilymarried:NewboldwasHodgsonwasrejected.Newbold,whoseemsto havebeenHodgson'sonlyconfidant,addsthatMissDensmorewasfrequentlymentionedinthesittingsof 1895. Thisincident(knownasthe"Huldah"casefromthesecondnamewronglyassignedtoMissDensmore) showstheimportanceofpreservingcompleterecords.Italsoshowsthetenacityofthesubconscious memory.Mrs.PiperintrancerememberedwhathadpassedintrancebetweenherandthelivingHodgson elevenyearsearlier(Newbold's"eightornineyears"wasanunderstatement)andalsorememberedthat Newboldwastheonesitterwhocouldhavebeenexpectedtorememberit.Tononeoftheothersittersto whomtheControlspokeoftheaffairwasanysuggestionmadethattheyrememberedit.Newboldinastate ofordinaryconsciousnessrememberedwhathehadbeentold,alsoinaconsciousstate,elevenyears before.Ineachcasethememoryseemstohavebeenlatentinthesubconsciousformanyyearsin Newbold'sprobablyforlessthaneleven,asforsometimeafter1895hewouldalmostcertainlyhaveretained aconsciousmemoryofit.Ineachcasethememoryisrevivedbyanappropriatestimulusinhercaseby Hodgson'sdeathandthepresenceofhisfriendsathersittingsinhisbyhertrancereferencetotheincident athissitting.Forher,thewholeprocess,orsequenceofprocesses,(1)acquisitionofknowledge,(2) retention,(3)revival,wassubconscious.ForNewboldonlystage(2)wassubconscious,boththeacquisition oftheknowledgeandtherevivalofthememorybeingconsciousprocesses. Latentmemory(or"cryptomnesia")isaparticularlybafflingproblem,anditspossibleoccurrenceina communicationthroughamediumorthroughautomaticwritingishardtoassessowingtoindividual

    differencesbetweenonepersonandanother,tothevaryingstatesofmindinwhichtheinitial(1)andfinal(3) stagesmaytakeplace,andtothefactthatwhentheknowledgeisacquiredinaconsciousstate,the secondprocessmustbesubdividedinto(2a)relegationtothesubconscious,asNewboldrelegatedhis knowledgeofHodgson'sproposal,and(2b)retentionofwhathasbeensorelegated. TolatentmemoryIaminclinedtoassigntherathernumerouscorrectstatementsIrecentlyreceivedfroma nonprofessionalmediumaboutmyancestorsandoneofmylivingrelatives.Almosteverythingsaidduring thetranceaboutmyancestorswascorrect.Itcouldbeverifiedfromworksofreference,acarefulreadingof whichwouldhoweveralsoshowthatafewmistakesweremade.Aboutmylivingrelativemuchwassaidthat wastrueandcouldbeverifiedfrombooksofreferencethatweresufficientlyuptodate.Butthetrue statementsabouthimweremixedwithseveralthatwerefictitiouse.g.,accountsofconversationsthat nevertookPlacewithdeadpersonsinwhomthemediumwasinterested.Moreoverthebackgroundofthe communicationswasaltogetherunreal,bothasregardsthecharacterandopinionsofthepersonsnamed, andthesignificanceofsomeofthefactsstatedcorrectly.ItisnogoodcrossexaminingControlsastotheir statementsandIrefrainedfromattemptingtodothis,butIdeliberatelygavetheControlseveralopeningsto expandbytalkingofmattersconnectedwiththepersonsnamedwhichwereknowntomebutcouldnotbe foundinbooksofreference.TheControlneverfollowedupmylead. Itwasobviousthatthemedium'ssubconscioushaderectedastructureofimaginativefictiononabasisof fact.Forimaginativefictionordramatisationthesubconscious,aswasshowninpreviouschapters,hasa markedpropensity.Buthowinthisinstancedidthebasisoffactgetthere?Thecorrectstatementswere toonumerousandtoofarremovedfromthecommonplacetobeattributabletochance,evenwhenliberal allowancewasmadeforthemistakes.Allthefactshad,Ithink,atsometimebeenwithinmyconscious knowledge,thoughIhadtoverifysomeofthemfromprintedsources.Ifhoweverthecommunicationswerea telepathicreflectionofmyconsciousand/orsubconsciousmind,whythiscuriousdistinctionbetween largelycorrectfact,andwhollyincorrectbackground?If,again,itwasarealcommunicationfromtheother world,whythisinabilitytomakecorrectstatementsastomattersnottobefoundinthereferencebooks? Themostprobableexplanationseemstometobethatthemedium,forpurposesquiteunconnectedwith thesesittings,hadoccasiontolookuppassagesinbooksofreference,andthatglancingthroughthepages casuallyshehadcomeonreferencestomyrelatives,livinganddead.Shemayneverhaveconsciously digestedwhatshethuscameacross,buthavingwhatiscalleda"flypapermind",passeditonundigested tohersubconsciousmemory,whichassimilateditwithothermatteracquiredinthesameway.This explanationhasalreadybeensuggestedinconnectionwiththecaseofAbrahamFlorentineintherecordsof StaintonMoses:seeChapterIX.ItmayalsoexplaintheMargaretVeleyscriptsofDr.Soal:seeSPRProc . XXXVIII281374. MargaretVeley(18431887)wasanovelistandpoetofsomenoteduringherlife.Whenin1927and1928 Dr.Soalandafriendproducedanumberofscriptspurportingtobecommunicationsfromher,andasked metolookintothem,Ihadneverheardofher,butonlookingherupintheDictionaryofNationalBiography whilethescriptswereinprogressIwasastonishedtofindthatalmosteverythingsaidinthemaboutherlife andwritingswascorrect.OtherstatementsvolunteeredbytheCommunicatorcouldalsobeverifiedas correctfromtheprefacetooneofhernovelsandfromlocaldirectoriesofthedistrict,Braintree,Essex, whereherfamilylived.Mainly,however,throughfriendsandrelationsofMargaretVeley,Igottoknowfacts aboutherandherfamilywhichwerenottobefoundinanyofthesebooks.Questionsonthesematters, someofwhichwereofdeepinteresttoMargaretVeleywhenalive,metwithpracticallynoresponse.(After rereadingmyreportrecentlyImustadmitthatsomeofthequestionssavouredofcrossexamination,and dealtwithmattersthatshouldhavebeenintroducedmoredelicately.) Inmyreport(Proc .XXXVIII,322323)Isummedupmyanalysisoftheveridicalelementinthe communicationsasfollows: "Itwill,Ithink,begenerallyagreedthattheproportionofsuccesstofailure,asregards mattersoutsidetheadmittednormalknowledgeoftheautomatists,isunusuallyhighinthese scripts,iftheyarecomparedwithmostostensiblyspiritisticcommunications.Theverifiable statements(andtheunverifiableresiduumisverysmall)maybeclassifiedunderfourheads, asfollows: "(A)Statements,whethervolunteeredbyM.V.ormadeinreplytoquestions,whichcanbe verifiedfromtheD.N.B.andtheMS[i.e.,thenovelalreadymentioned].

    "(B)Statements,whethervolunteeredorinreplytoquestions,whichcanbeverifiedfrom matterscatteredupanddownaconsiderablenumberofotherbooks,e.g.volumesofthe CountyDirectory. "(C)Statementsvolunteeredastomatterswhichcannotbeverifiedfromanyprintedsource whichI1havebeenabletotrace"[thesourcesconsultedbymewerelistedinafootnote occupyinghalfapageofsmallprint]. "(D)Statementsinreplytoquestionsregardingmatterswhichcannotbeverifiedfromany suchsource. "Thesuccessisalmostperfectunderhead(A)andthefailurealmostcompleteunderhead (D).Underbothheads(B)and(C)thereisamixtureofsuccessandfailure,withthe successeslargelypreponderating." MyreportwasshowninprooftotwoofMargaretVeley'srelativeswitharequestthattheyshouldsay whetherintheiropinionthescriptswerecharacteristicofheroutlookonlifeandhabitsofthought.Oneof themthoughtthattheearlierpartofthescriptsfellinwithherrecollections,butthelaterpartsdidnotthe other(aniece)thattherewasnothingthatrecalledherauntinanyway,itbeingallmostunlikeherinwhat wassaidandthewayofsayingit. ThescriptsincludedseveralversesostensiblydictatedbyMargaretVeley.ThesecondpartoftheSPR report,entitled"TheLiteraryStyleoftheScripts"wascontributedbyDr.Soal,whopreferredatthetimeto heknownas"Mr.W'.HedidnotregardcryptomnesiaasamajorexplanationoftheMargaretVeleyscripts, differingastothisfromtheviewIhaveexpressed. Itisnotsurprisingthatinmanycasesdifferentviewsastothepossibleoperationoflatentmemoryare expressed,sincesomanyuncertainfactorsarelikelytobeinvolved.IntheAbrahamFlorentinecaseitwas possibletopaintwithfaircertaintytoaparticularprinteddocumentasthesourcefromwhichthe communicationhadbeenderived,owingtothepresenceinitofanunusualformofwordsandofamistake, bothofwhichwererepeatedinthecommunication.ThissourcewasanObituaryNoticeinanAmerican newspaper,andifthepaperinquestionhadfirstappearedafterthecommunicationhadbeenmade,the casemightpossiblybeconsideredasprecognitive.Again,iftheObituary,thoughappearingbeforethe communication,couldnotpossiblyhavebeenseenbyStaintonMoses,itmightperhapsberegardedasan instance,anexceptionallygoodinstance,ofclairvoyance.Butashecouldhaveseenit,thoughthereisno directevidencethathedid,itissafertoinvokeanormalfactorsuchaslatentmemoryratherthana paranormalone,suchasprecognitionorclairvoyance. Adefinitesourcecanseldombeindicatedwithasmuchcertaintyasinthatcase.Thenumberofitemsof informationwhichmostpeopleacquirebyreadingbooks,newspapers,andbusinessdocumentsandby conversationisincalculable.Itissometimessaidthatthesubconscious,likethetraditionalelephant,never forgets.Howclever,orhowlucky,manhasbeentoconstructconsciousnessasashelterunderwhichhe canconducthisordinaryaffairsunembarrassedbyunwantedmemoriesofallthetrivialitiesthrustonhis attentionhourbyhour,daybyday,bynewspapers,conversationwithfellowcommutersandallthe apparatusofcivilisedlife! Thathoweverisnotthestuffofwhichcommunicationsaremade,notatanyratesuchcommunicationsas anyoneneedbotherabout.Theinterestcentresoncorrectstatementsoffactslessaccessibletothe generalpublic,whichmaythereforebeconsideredasprobablyunknowntothemedium,unlessthereare groundsforsupposingthatinthiscontexthisnormalknowledgeexceedstheaverage.Itisthereforemost desirabletoascertainasdefinitelyaspracticableinwhatbookorotherdocumentthestatementsmaybe found,ortowhomtherelevantfactswereknown.Bythismeansonecanformafairassessmentofthe probabilityofamediumacquiringthenecessaryknowledgeinhisordinaryreadingorconversation.As statedabove,wearenotconsideringpossiblefraudulentacquisitionofknowledge.Onecanalsoinferhow longbeforethecommunicationwasmadetheknowledgewasfirstacquired,orwasconfirmedonsomelater occasion.Thisisamatterofimportanceinjudgingtheprobabilityofinformationonceacquiredbeing forgottenbytheconsciousmind. IntheHuldahcaseNewbold,whenpromptedbytheHodgsonControl,saidhe"began"torememberthe

    Chicagolady,whichseemstosuggestthathestillretainedaconsciousmemoryoftheaffair,butaverydim andvagueone.Theincidentwasthenelevenyearsold,and,haditconcernedamatterofindifferenceto Newbold,mightwellhaveslippedhisconsciousmemoryaltogether.Thesurprisingthingisthatheshould nothaveretainedevenafterthatlapseoftimeaclearermemoryofanaffairthat,owingtohisfriendshipwith Hodgsonandhisownengagement,mustwhenitwashappeninghavearousedhiskeeninterest.Inthe Veleycaseallthedocumentsmentionedaspossiblesourcesofinformationhadbeeninexistenceformany years.Dr.SoalseemstohavehadnopersonalinterestintheVeleys,andifitwasinfactacaseof cryptomnesia,hisnormalacquisitionoftheknowledgeaboutthemshowninthescriptsmightdateback longenoughtoaccountforithavingcompletelyfadedfromhisconsciousmind.Asregardsthe communicationsmadeaboutmyrelatives,Icannotsupposethattheiraffairswereinthemselvesofany interesttothemedium,sothattheycouldwell,sotospeak,havegoneinatonecarofherconsciousmind andoutattheother,thoughsomeofthefacts,iflearntfromwrittensources,couldonlyhavebeenlearnt withinafewmonthsbeforethesitting. Considerthecaseofamediumwhoinadissociatedstatemakescorrectstatementsoffactwhichare showntohimwhenhereturnstoordinaryconsciousness.Hemayrecognisethemasfactspreviously knowntohisconsciousmind,butforgottenbyit:hemayfurtherbeabletorecollecthowandwhenhecame toknowthem.Supposehoweverthat(a)apossiblesourceofinformationcanbeshown,but(b)hefailsto recognisethefactsaspreviouslyknowntohim,ortorecognisethepossiblesourcewhenpointedoutto him,isthatanindicationthatheneverknewthemnormally?That,latentmemorybringexcluded,hehas acquiredtheinformationinsomeother,paranormalway? Thiscanonlybeansweredbyaskingseveralfurtherquestions.Howaccessibletothemediumwerethe supposedsourcesofinformation?Howcomplexistheknowledgeshown?Isitsuchascouldheacquired byanyonerunninghiseyeoverapage,orbyreadingafewpagesoncewithoutspecialattention:ormusta closeandcarefulstudybesupposed?Howlonganintervaloftimewastherebetweenthesupposeddateof acquisitionandthecommunication?Mostimportantofall,howkeenaninterestintherelevantfactscanbe assumedanthemedium'spartatthedatewhen,ifever,hemayhaveacquiredknowledgeofthem? Certainanswerstothesequestionsmayoftenheunattainable.Butbycombiningwhatseemtobethemost likelyanswerstoeach,onecanformafairlygoodassessmentoftherespectivedegreesofprobabilitytobe assignedtothehypothesesofparanormalactivityandoflatentmemory. Itisaverycommonexperience,ifoneglancesrapidlyat,say,thecolumnofdeathsrecordedina newspaper,toreceivetheimpressionthatsomewhereinthesmallertypegivingdetailsofwherethepersons namedhadlivedortheplaceoftheirdeathisthenameofaparticularstreetorvillagewithwhichonehas somesortofassociation.Onecannotsayjustwhereinthecolumnitoccurs,butacarefulreadingwillshow thattheimpressionwascorrect.Thenamehasregisteredbutnotwiththedefinitionthatattachestothings perceivedinfullawareness. Psychologistsintheirexperimentshavegoneastagefurther.Ithasbeenshownthatsensorystimulitoo fainttobeconsciouslyperceivedmaynonethelesshaveregisteredinthesubconscious,byaprocess called"subception".Forinstance,arollofcinemafilmiscut,andasingleexposurefromaquitedifferent filmisinserted.Therollwiththeinsertionisthenflashedonthescreenattheusualrate,sorapidly,thatis, thatthespectatorcannotconsciouslyseewhattheinsertionis,oreventhattherehasbeenanyinterruption ofthesequence.Butsubconsciouslyhemaynotonlyhavenotedtheinterruptionbuthaveobservedthe natureoftheinsertion. Use,asisgenerallyknown,hasbeenmadeofthisbyadvertisers,andreferencestoithavebeenmadein thePressunderthedescriptionof"subliminal"or"splitsecond"advertising.Inviewofthepossibleethical andpoliticalconsequencestheprofessionalassociations,ofadvertisersintheUnitedKingdomandthe UnitedStateshavepronouncedagainstitscommercialuse. Itwouldhoweverseematpresentthatthereisaconsiderabledifferencebetweenexperimentalsubception, orthemarginalperceptionwhichwefrequentlyobserveasfollowingcasualglancesatanewspaper,andthe facultywhichwouldaccountforevensosimpleacaseasthatofAbrahamFlorentine.Wheretheamountof verifiabledetailinacommunicationisevengreaterthanwastransmittedinthatcasetheplausibilityof subceptionasanexplanationisverysmall. Doubtfulquestionsofchancecoincidenceandlapsedmemoryarenotofcoursepeculiartopsychical

    research,anditissometimeshelpfultoconsidertheminanunrelatedcontext.Alibelactionwasnotvery longagodecidedintheCourts,theplaintiffbeinganactresswhocomplainedthathernamehadbeen attachedtoaveryobnoxiouscharacterinanovel.Therewereseveralotherparticularsapplicabletoherself whichalsoappearedasconnectedwiththischaracterinthebook.TheChristiannameofbothrealand fictionalpersonswasthesame:sowasthesurname,anunusualone.Bothhadredorreddishhair.Both wereactressesconnectedwithatheatreinthesameprovincialtown.Theprincipalactorinthenovelhada namecloselyresemblingthatoftheprincipalactorintheplaintiff'scompany.Boththeplaintiffandher fictionalcounterpartwereofthesamereligiouspersuasion.Therealandfictionalactorwerealsoofthe samereligionaseachother,butadifferentonefromthatoftheplaintiff.Therewerethussevenpointsof closeresemblancebetweenfactandfiction.Theauthorofthenovelsaidshehadneverheardoftheplaintiff, thattheresemblanceswereaccidental,andthatinoneimportantparticulartherewasamarkeddivergence, theactionofthenovelbeingdatedaboutagenerationbeforetheplaintiff'sprofessionalengagementatthe townmentioned. Theplaintiffwonhercase,therebyvindicatinghercharacter,butthescaleofdamagesawardedhershowed thattheCourtacceptedtheauthor'sstatementthatsheintendednoreferencetotheplaintiffandhadindeed neverheardofher.Theauthorcouldofcourseonlyspeakastoherconsciousknowledgeandmemory. Latentmemory(cryptomnesia)isthereforeleftasanalternativeexplanationtosheerchancecoincidence. Manycommunicationsquotedasevidenceforsurvivalshowamuchlessremarkableconstellationof correspondencesthanistobefoundinthisaction.

    Chapter11:CommunicationsThroughMediums II:AsaffectedbyParanormalFacultiesoftheLiving
    W.H.Salter THEQUESTIONnowtobediscussediswhetherallcommunicationsthatcannotbeassignedto normalfactorscanbeadequatelyaccountedforbytheparanormalfacultiesoflivingpeople,orWhether,in somecasesatleast,itisnecessarytolookfurtherafield.ForreasonsgiveninChapterIIthesupernatural' cannotbebroughtwithinthescopeofthisdiscussion,whichmustthereforebelimitedasregardsthe choiceofpossiblecausestothefacultiesofpersonslivinginthebodyontheonehand,anddiscarnate activityontheother.(Inadiscussionwhetherafteraman'sbodilydeath,anythingpersistsmoreorless comparabletohispersonalitywhenintheflesh,"discarnate"iswellestablishedasanappropriatetermfor suchacondition.) Communicationsthroughmediumspurport,sofarastheyareevidential,toshowknowledgenotpossessed bythemediumandtobecharacteristicof,andemanatefrom,somepersonorpersonsnolongerinthis bodyoffleshandblood.Itisnecessarytoaddtheselastwords,becauseoftheviewthatthedeadinhabita tenuous,quasimaterialbody,whichiscapableofmanifestingitselfinsanceroommaterialisations,"spirit" photographs,etc.Theevidencefromphenomenasupposedtosupportthisviewwasrejectedinearlier chapters. SometimestoolittleisknownabouttheallegedCommunicatortoshowwhetherthemessagesattributedto himareinfactcharacteristic:theymustbeacceptedassuchontrust,ifatall.Thebestalittleknown Communicatorcandoistoproducesomethingnottooobviouslyuntypicalofthecountry,periodand positioninlifewhichheclaimsashisown,andtosupplementthisbyothermatterwhichthesitterwill acceptasbeingbeyondthenormalpowersofthemedium.Spokenorwrittencommunicationsare sometimesmadeinlanguageswhicharesaidtobeunknowntothemedium.Butitisnottooeasytobe certainhowmuchknowledgeapersonpossessesofalanguageofwhichhequitehonestlybelieveshimself innocent.Mostofushaveatsometimeacquired,intravelorbycasualreading,thesmallchangeof conversationinquiteanumberoflanguagesbesidesthoseofwhichweadmitknowledge,andthismaypour outintrance,justasthemostrespectablepersonsmayreleaseafloodofblasphemyandobscenityunder ananaesthetic.Thereisthefurtherdifficultythattrancespeechisoftenindistinct:aneagersittermay imaginehehearsmorethanhedoes,andmayreporthavinghadalongconversationwiththeControlin someforeigntonguewhichhehimselfspeaksfluently,whenhehasdoneninetenthsofthetalkandthe Controlhasmerelyproducedsomealmostinaudiblemutters,interspersedwithafewphrases,"Howdoyou do?","Goodnight",etc.,inthelanguageusedbythesitter. Thedifficultyofassessingas.evidenceforsurvivalcommunicationsclaimingtocomefromanobscure individualofanearlierageiswellillustratedbythecaseofPatienceWorth,whichhasarousedenormous interestinAmericaandagooddealintheUnitedKingdom.Thereisfortunatelyafullreportpublishedbythe BostonSPR(1927),byaverycarefulinvestigator,theWalterPrincementionedinanearlierchapter.The communicationscamethroughtheautomaticwritingofaMrs.Curran,whowasthirtyyearsoldwhenthey beganin1913.Prince'sreportbeginswithanautobiographicalsketchbyMrs.Curranherself.Shewasalso askedbyPrinceanumberofquestionsastohereducationandinterests,andthereportprintsherreplies. Severalofheracquaintancesconfirmedherstatementsandtestifiedtoherintegrity.Thestudentisthus fortunateinbeingwellplacedtojudgewhetherhervoluminousautomaticoutputcanreasonablybe attributedtoMrs.Curran'sownmind,consciousorsubconscious.Itissufficientheretosaythather educationwasmoderateandsheneverhadanystrongbookishorhistoricalinterests. PatienceWorthwasthenameclaimedbytheCommunicator.Volubleinotherrespects,sheisvagueor reticentastothefactsofherearthlyexistence.Itmayhoweverbegatheredthatshewasbornsomewhere inEngland,possiblyinDorset,wasafarmworkerwhoemigratedtooneoftheAmericanColonies,andwas killedinaraidbyRedIndians.Thereisnoprecisestatementastothedatesofherbirth,emigrationor death,orastotheplacewhereshedied.ApparentlyitallhappenedduringtheSeventeenthCentury.With somanypointsleftdoubtfulitisnotsurprisingthatshehasnotyetbeenidentifiedwithanydemonstrably realperson.Princesays(p.34)that"shecouldnotbebroughttoplaceanyvaluationongivingdataabout herallegedlifeonearth".

    Exactidentificationbeingimpracticable,canitbesaidthathercommunicationsarecharacteristicofher supposedroleasaseventeenthcenturyEnglishfarmgirltransplantedtoNorthAmerica,perhapsfrom Dorset?Thecommunicationsarepartlyinverse,partlyinprose.InTelk a,whoseproseandverseare mixed,bothareinEnglishsofarremovedfrompresentdayusageastodeterallbutthemostresolute reader.Thelanguagehasbeenstudiedbyscholarswhoreportanextremelyhighproportionofwordsof AngloSaxonoriginandanalmostentireabsenceofwardsofrecentintroduction,butatthesametimedo notfinditcharacteristicofanyspecificperiodordistrict.Ifthesefindingsaretrue,theyseemtomenotto leavemuchofacaseforsupposingthatthebookwasdictatedorinspiredbyanyindividualwhoatanytime hadanearthlyexistence,ifMrs.Curranherselfmaybeleftoutofaccount. Thereremainshoweveraproblemraisingadifferentbutdifficultissue.Couldanyonebyconsciouseffort writeinalanguageasarchaisticasthatofTelk awithafluencyequaltoMrs.Curran's,unlesshehadmade amuchmoreintensivestudyofEarlyandMiddleEnglishthanthereisanyreasontoattributetoher?How manycoulddoitevenafterconsiderablestudy,doitconsciouslyanddeliberately,thatis?Itshouldhowever benotedthatthelinguisticknowledgerequiredisnegative,thatistosayabilitytokeepoffwordsofLatin derivationorrecentintroduction,ortousethemsparingly. InadditiontothelinguisticproblemPatienceWorthraisesthequestionastothesourceoftheliterary powerandskillwhichgoodcriticshavefoundinthebooks,severalofwhich,itmaybenoted,arewrittenin languagefreefromarchaisms.Itwasarguedinanearlierchapterthatimaginativewritingofthehighest order,likeParadiseLost,oftengavegroundsforsupposingittobetheproductoftheauthor's subconscious,impersonatingsomeexternalsourceofinspiration,suchasMilton'sUrania.PatienceWorth, bothinlinguisticskillandliterarypower,goesbeyondwhatmightbeexpectedfromtheMrs.Curranof everydaylife,butitdoesnotseemnecessarytolookbeyondhersubconscious,providedoneconcedestoit powersparallel,thoughonamuchlowerlevelofachievement,tothoseshowninthepoemsofMilton,Blake andShelley.Whetherornotpowersofthiskindaretoberegardedasparanormal,isamereverbal question. ThefacultiesgenerallydescribedbythephraseExtrasensoryPerception(ESP)ontheotherhand,are undoubtedlyparanormal,iftheyreallyexist.Oftherealityofoneofthem,telepathy,Ihavenodoubt,andI shallthereforeconsideritsbearingonmessagesreceivedthroughmediums,beforedoingthelikewith regardtoprecognitionandclairvoyance.Thegenerallyaccepteddefinitionoftelepathy,"thecommunication ofimpressionsofanykindfromonemindtoanother,independentlyoftherecognisedchannelsofsense" (seeglossarytoHumanPersonalityandabove),wouldcovercasesofthoughttransferenceoccurring,not onlybetweenalivingagentandalivingpercipient,butalsocaseswhereoneorbothweredead.Strict correctnesswouldthereforecallfortheuseinthefirstcaseofthewords"telepathybetweentheliving",but toavoidprolixityIshallusethesingleword"telepathy"insuchcases,unlessthelongerphraseisneeded topreventconfusion. Itwasnaturalandrightthat,whenintheearlyyearsofMrsPiper'smediumshippsychicalresearchersfor thefirsttimehadtoconsiderseriouslycommunicationsostensiblycomingfromthe,spiritsofthedead, alternativeexplanationsshouldbeexamined,includingpossibletelepathybetweenthesitterandthe medium.Andexaminationshowedthattelepathywasnotmerelyapossibilityofhermediumshipbutthat therewasevidenceofitsactualoccurrence. ForinstanceRichardHodgson,whostrenuouslymaintainedthesurvivalistviewofthecommunicationsthat camethroughMrs.Piper,hadonedaybeenreadingwithgreatinterestandattentionWalterScott'sLifeand Letters .Thenextday"Scott"madehisfirstappearanceataPipersitting,theverylaughable"Scott"who saidthereweremonkeysinthesun.ThemostreasonableexplanationofthisincidentwouldbethatMrs. Piper'ssubconscioustappedbytelepathyHodgson'sstrongcontemporaryinterestinScott,andwasinthis waystimulatedtoproduceafeebledramatisationofScott,embellished,asregardsthemonkeys,witha morselofthedreamphantasywithwhichmostpeople'ssubconsciousiswellstored. TheWalterScottcaseisnotanisolatedone.Severalotherinstancesmightbequotedofasitter'sthoughts beinggivenhimas"communications"incircumstanceswhichpointstronglytothesitter'smindratherthan tothatofthepurportingCommunicatorasthesource.Thesittermayforinstancereceivethroughthe mediummessagesmakingstatementsthatatthetimehebelievestobetrue,butwhichonenquiryhefinds tobeincorrect.

    WalterLeaf,reportingontheearlystageofthePipermediumship,mentions(Proc .VI.568571)thesittings whichhisfriendJ.T.ClarkehadwithMrs.PiperfirstinAmericainSeptember1889andtheninDecember ofthatyearinEngland.Clarke,whosevisittoAmericawascausedbyafinancialfailurethelossfromwhich hewastryingtominimise,wastoldbytheControl.thathewasinfinancialtrouble,butwould"wadethrough italllight"withinfourandahalfmonths.TheControlcontinued,"Therearepartiesthathaven'tdealt honourablywithyou".Thepredictionproveduntrue,asdidtheaccusationaboutthe"parties".But,adds Clarkeinhisnoteonthesittings,thoughtheactionofthemeninquestionhadinfactbeenentirely honourable,"mymindatthetimeundeniablyentertainedsomeapprehensionlestthefactsshouldproveto havebeenotherwise". LaterinthesamesittingClarkewaswarnedemphaticallyagainstaman,H.Hesaysthatatthetimehe entertained"anunwarrantabledistrust"ofH.which"wassoonremovedaltogetherbyacloseracquaintance withfacts".AndlateragaintheControl,afterasupposedvisittoClarke'shouseinEngland,saidthata"big manwithadarkmoustache"hadbeeninthekitchenagoodwhileduringtheday,thathehadbeenput theretowatchtheplaceandwastrustworthy.Clarke,beforeleavingEngland,hadarrangedthatincertain circumstancesapolicemanshouldbehiredtoguardthehouse:atthetimeofthesittinghedidnotknow whetherthisarrangementhadbeencarriedout,butwas"readytosupposethatamanwaswatchingthe "house".Infactnopoliceman,whetherlargeorsmall,withorwithoutmoustache,hadbeencalledin. NotlongafterthisMrs.PipercametoEnglandattheinvitationoftheSPR,travellingonthesameshipas Mr.Clarke,andgavesittingstoseveralprominentmembersoftheSociety.ShealsogaveasittingatMr. Clarke'shouse,whenseveralmessagesweregivenabouttherelationsofMrs.ClarkewhowasGermanby birth.AlthoughmostofwhattheControl,Phinuit,saidastohermotherandsomeofhernearrelationsin Germanywaswrong,hescoredanumberofremarkablesuccesses,especiallyinconnectionwithanUncle C.andhischildren. Phinuitmadethefollowingstatements:(1)thatMrs.ClarkehadbelongingtohersomeonecalledM.,the Germannamebeingcorrectlypronounced:thatM.,laterreferredtoasasisterhadtroublewithherankles (Mrs.Clarkehadasisterofthatnamewhowasbedriddenfortenyears)(2)thatshehadasisterE.(3) andanothersisterwhopainted(4)thattherewasanuncleC.,nowinthespirit,whohadbeenoffhismind (5)thatUncleC.hadason,E.,alsodead"Therewassomethingthematterwithhisheart,andwithhis head.Hesaysitwasanaccident."LaterPhinuitsaid"hewashurtthere(makesmotionofstabbingheart)". Mrs.Clarkenotesthatthiscousin"committedsuicideinafitofmelancholiabystabbinghisheart".(6)That UncleC.'swidowhadabdominaltrouble.Mrs.Clarkesaysinhernote,"astrikingaccountofmyuncle's familyinGermany.Thenamesandfactsareallcorrect."Thisisnotquiteexact,asthecousinE.'sdeath wasnotduetoanaccidentthoughhemaypossiblyhavewishedthatthisfamilyshouldregarditinthat way. Leaf'scomment,afterreferringtoMrs.Piper'smeetingwithClarkeinAmericaandonboardship,is(p.559): "Itwillbesuggestednodoubtthatshehadsucceededinpumpinghimastohiswife'sfamily inthecourseofconversation.Thatanymancouldhaveimpartedunconsciouslysuchcurious andunusualfamilyhistoriesasthosetoldtoMrs.Clarkewouldbeamazingenough.'the suppositionissimplyimpossibletothosewhohavehadtheopportunityofwatchingMrs. Piper,andestimatingthesingularlylimitedrangeofherconversation,anditsinadequacyfor thesubtledesignsattributedtoit.M"oversomeofthefactsstatedwereunknowntoMr. Clarkehimselftillheheardthemassertedbythemediumandconfirmedbyhiswife." Leaf,averycautiousandcriticalman,commentingonthewholeseriesofMrs.Piper'ssittingsonthisvisit toEngland,tooktheviewthat,whiletherewassomeflukingandfishing,thesewouldnotbythemselves accountforallhersuccessfulhits,butthatiftheyweresupplementedby"thoughttransference",as telepathywasoftencalledinthosedays,nofurtherexplanationwasneeded.SomeoftheotherSPR investigatorsofthattime,suchasHodgson,LodgeandMyers,werepreparedtogofurther:thepointtobe notedhereisthattheyandLeafwereunanimousthattelepathyfromthelivingwastheminimumhypothesis worthconsidering. Moredirectevidencefortheinterventionoftelepathyincommunicationsprofessingtocomefromthedead maybefoundin.caseswhereasitterhasfoistedonthemediumafictitious"Communicator"ofhisown invention.Thisprocedurehasproducedinterestingresults.Onthedebitsidemustbesetthelossof confidencebetweenmediumandsitter,whichmayadverselyaffectlatersitters.WithmediumslikeMrs.

    PiperandMrs.Leonard,whohaveshownthemselvesanxioustocooperateinexperiments,itismuch bettertofollowuplinesofexperimentthathavebeenpreviouslyexplainedtoandapprovedbythem,oreven linesthattheyhavethemselvessuggested. TheClarkesittingsmaybetakenastypicalofgoodsittingsuncomplicatedbyexperiment.Manyofthe messageswerecompletelywrong:othersweredoubtfulorshowedrightandwrongmixedinvarious proportions:severalothersagainwereright,andwereneithercommonplacenorscatteredatrandomamong themistakes,butclusteredroundparticulartopics.Wheresuccessesareclusteredinthisway,eitherin mediumisticcommunicationsorintheresultsofexperiments,itisnotreasonabletostrikeanaveragefor thewholesittingorexperiment,and,ifthataverageprovesneartheborderlineofchance,todenythe significanceofthesuccesses.Thequestioniswhether,asLeafargued,telepathyisasufficientexplanation forthesuccessfulhitsintheClarkesittingsandinothersittingsofthesamegeneraltype,andtheanswer willdependonwhatviewistakenoftelepathy,andbywhatevidencethatviewisdetermined. Amodernstudentwillnaturallyhaveintheforefrontofhismindthequantitativeexperimentsofthelastthirty yearsorso.AlittleevidenceofthiskindexistedwhenLeafwrote,butagreatrevivalofthislineofresearch waspioneeredbyTyrrell,andhasbeenvigorouslypromotedbyCaringtonandSoalinthiscountry,andby RhineandothersinAmerica.Theirexperimentshavebeyonddoubtaddedgreatlytothecogencyofthe argumentfortelepathyasarealfaculty.Theyareclearcutinawaythatexperimentswith"free"material cannotbe,andaremoredirectlyaffirmativethan"crisisapparitions",forwhichalternativeexplanationshave beenputforward.Ihaveinanearlierchapterexpressedmypersonalacceptanceofthetelepathicviewof veridicalspontaneousexperiences,butthatview,howevercorrect,dependsoninference.Unfortunatelythe moreprecise,scientific,statisticallyassessableexperimentsare,thelessinformativetheyareinsome respects.Theycan,itwouldseem,showwhattypeofpersonislikelytoproveagoodpercipienthowfar beliefordisbeliefinthefacultyislikelytoinfluencetheresultspositivelyornegativelywhatstimulative effectisproducedbyalcohol,mescaline,eroticpictures,andsoon.Allthatofcoursehasitsvalue. Theprecisionwithwhichtheresultsofquantitativeexperimentcanbeassessedisduetotheuseofa limitednumberoftargetsforthepercipienttoaimat,fivesimplediagrams,itmaybe,orfiveassorted animals.Butexceptinanexperimentofthiskind,thehumanminddoesnotEmititselftomakingchoices betweenfivesymbols,noneofanyinteresttoit.Theexperimentsusuallyconsistofaseriesofrunseachof twentyfiveguesses.Supposethatinonerunthepercipientguessesalltwentyfiveright:supposeeventhat infortyconsecutiverunstotallingonethousandguesseshescoresonethousandhits,itisimpossibleto saywhichofthoseonethousandhitswereparanormal,sincebyunaidedchancehewouldhavescoredtwo hundredofthemorthereabouts,andthereisnomethodofdiscriminatingbetweenthetwohundredflukes andtheeighthundredinstancesoftelepathy.Twohundredtimesheguessed,say,zebrawhenzebrawas thetarget,butitisimpossibletosayonhowmanyofthosetwohundredtimes,oronwhichofthemheand theagentwereenrapport,ifindeed,whichcannotbeproved,theywereeverenrapportsofarasthezebras wereinvolved.Againtarget,guess,target,guessfolloweachotherwithmachinelikeregularityatintervalsof afewseconds,bothagentandpercipientbeingfullyconsciousatthetime. Atalmosteverypointtheexperimentalsituationdifferswidelyfromthemediumistic.Itistruethatwherethe communicationsconsistofnothingmorethancommonplacenames,TomandDickandHarry,thezebra situationisreproduced.IfthesitterhappensinfacttohavelostanearfriendcalledTom,thementionofthat nameatasittingmaybeaflukeagain,itmaynot.Whocansay? ConsiderhowevertheinformationgiventhroughMrs.PiperaboutMrs.Clarke'sGermanuncleandhisson E.,whostabbedhimselfintheheart.Thereisadefinitecorrectstatementforwhichanexplanation,normal orparanormal,hastobefound.Thenormalexplanationsare(1)chancenotveryplausibleinviewofthe unusualcircumstancesdescribed(2)cryptomnesiaagain,notveryplausibleinviewoftherecencyofthe acquaintancebetweenMrs.PiperandtheClarkes(3)fishing,orsomeotherdubiouspractice,whichmay beruledoutbyMrs.Piper'sknownintegrityandtheconsiderationsurgedbyLeafinhiscomments.In defaultofareasonableexplanationofanormalsort,onemusthaverecoursetosomeparanormal hypothesis,whetheritbetelepathybetweenmediumandsitterattheperiodofthesittingwhenthese statementsaremade,or,ifthatseemsinadequate,theparanormaltransmissionofinformationinsome otherway. Norwherehitsoccurinsittings,arethey,asinquantitativeexperiments,separateselfcontainedaffairs, eachtakingupasecondortwo.Thehits,asintheClarkecase,oftenformagroup,connectedwitheach otherbysomecentraltopicoridea,andrequiringalongishtimetodevelop.Anotherdifference,whichmay

    ormaynotbematerial,isthatinsittingsoneofthepartiesisintranceorsomeconditionotherthanfull normalconsciousness. Duringthelasttwentyfiveyearsorsotheonlykindoftelepathywhichhasengagedtheattentioneitherof studentsofpsychicalresearchorofsuchmembersofthepublicashaveshownanyinterestinthatsubject, isthekinddemonstratedbyquantitativeexperiment.Betweentheresultsofthatkindofexperimentand communicationsreceivedthroughthemoresuccessfulmediumsthedifferencesaresomanyandsogreat astomakeitseemludicroustoexplainor,assomewouldsay,explainawayveridicalcommunicationsas duetonothingbuttelepathy.Theabsurdityishoweverduetotheneedlesslynarrowviewoftelepathynow generallyprevalent,andisgreatlyreducedifonetakesintoaccounttelepathyasitmanifestsitselfin experimentswith"free"material,orinveridicalcrisisapparitions.Inbothofthesethecontentbyits complexityandvariety,whilequiteunlikethebarechoicebetweenfivetargetsofferedinquantitative experiments,resemblesthatofcommunicationsthroughamedium,andalso,itistobenoted,thatofthe ordinaryprocessesofthought.Forthislastreasonqualitativeenquiry,experimental,spontaneous, mediumistic,isessentialtothecentralandultimatepurposeofpsychicalresearch. Theobjectionsometimesbroughtagainstitthatitfailstodistinguishbetweenflukesandsignificanthitsis oflittlesubstance.Inallformsofenquiryintoparanormalcognitioninstancesareboundtooccurinwhich theoperationofchancecannotbeeitherprovedordisproved.Asabasisfortheorythesemarginalcases mustbediscarded.Inquantitativeexperiment,inwhichtheyarefrequentlyfound,astatisticalruleofthumb isavailabletothisend.Intheotherformsofenquirycommonsense.Onedoesnotneedatapemeasureto ascertainthatanelephantislargerthanamouse.Eachformofenquiryhasitsownshortcomings,whichI haveattemptedtodescribechanceistheleastseriousofthem. Acceptancehoweverofaviewoftelepathywideenoughtoincludequalitativeexperimentsandcrisis apparitionsdoesnotimplythattelepathytherebybecomesanallsufficientexplanationofwhateververidical communicationscannotreasonablybeassignedtoanynormalcause.Beforethatcanbeassumedseveral situationsmustbeconsideredwheredifficultiesarisethroughtheverylimitedknowledgeweatpresent possessofthescopeoftelepathyandtheconditionsunderwhichitfunctions.Herearesomequestions.To whatextentissomenormalcontactbetweenagentandpercipientnecessary,orconducive,totelepathy betweenthem?Whatistheeffectofemotionalrelationshipbetweenthem?Isconsciouseffortonthepartof oneortheotheranecessary,orfavourablefactor?Istherapportbetweenthemcapableofenduringfora considerableperiod,tobemeasured,say,indays,ormonths,oryears?Istelepathyaonewayprocess,or ajointactivityofbothparties?Istheresuchathingasgrouptelepathy,inwhichtheactivitiesofseveral personsarecombined? Themoreelaboraterealisticapparitionssuggestthattheroleofthepercipientisnotentirelypassivebutthat onthesubconsciouslevelagentandpercipientcollaborate."Collectivepercipience"alsoimpliesmorethan simpleonewaytransferenceofthoughtbetweentwopersons.Thusthespontaneouscasesinthemselves, andapartfrommediumisticandotherphenomena,requirefortheirexplanationasortofinterpersonalmental activityofaparanormalkind,whichcan,ifonesowishes,becalled"telepathy",solongasoneisnotintoo greatahurrytoformulatearigiddefinitionofit. Iftelepathy,sofarastransmissionisconcerned,isanonphysicalprocessandtheverynotionofsucha thingisanathematomanyscientistsitgivessomesupporttotheconceptionofanonphysicalmodeof existenceafterthedissolutionofthebody.Thatatleastisaviewwhichhasoftenbeenmaintained.But whiletelepathybetweenthelivingmayincreasetheprobabilityofsurvival,italsodiminishesitsprovability, solongasitsscopecannotbemoreclearlydefined.Thedivergentviewsheldbypsychicalresearchersas tothishavebeenresponsiblefortheinconclusivenessofmanyoftheelaboratediscussionsonsurvival whichtakeupsomuchspaceinSPRProceedings .Inthecourseofthemveridicalcommunicationshave beencloselyexaminedtoseewhetherinstancescouldbefoundwhichcouldnotbeaccountedforby telepathy,atanyrateasbasicallyconceived,andexperimentshavebeendevised,sometimesatthe instanceofthemediums,ofakindthat,iftheyfailedtoexcludetelepathyaltogether,wouldatleastpushit furtherandfurtherawayintotheregionoftheimprobable. Thereasonfortheseexperiments,whichwillbedescribedinthenextchapter,isthatwhileinmostcasesof telepathy,whetherexperimentalorspontaneous,thereappearstobesomefairlyclosepsychological connectionbetweenthepartiesconcerned,whetherarisingfromkinship,orfriendship,orthefactthatthey areengagedinthejointadventureofanexperiment,spontaneouscasesdooccasionallyoccurinwhichno suchconnectionbetweenapparentagentandapparentpercipientcanbetraced.Thoroughinvestigation

    thereforeofacommunicationcomingthroughaMediummusttakeaccountofthepossibility,averyremote possibilityperhaps,thatthemedium'ssubconscioushaspickedupinformationnotonlyfromthemindsof thesitter,notetaker,andanyotherpersonwithwhomhehasbeeninnormalcontact,butalsofromsome otherunidentifiablemindsaswell. "Clairvoyance"isawordwhichhasoftenbeenvaguelyusedtodenoteanyvisualexperiencewhichcould notbeassignedtonormalsenseperception.Assouseditwouldincludetranscendentalvisionsofangels andothersupernaturalpersonsorobjects."Travellingclairvoyance"isstillsometimesusedtodescribe wakingvisionsordreamsofscenesthatareeitherimaginaryor,ifreal,remotefromtheactuallocalityofthe percipient.Butforalongtimenowpsychicalresearchershavegiven"clairvoyance"themoreprecise meaningofthedirectparanormalapprehensionofphysicalfactsbyapercipientwithouttheinterventionof anyothermind.Theselastwordsdistinguishitfromtelepathy.Supposeanewpackofplayingcardsis thoroughlyshuffledbyAandplacedfacedownwardsonatable,andthatBcominginfromanotherroom saysthatthecardsfromtwentytothirtyinthepackcountingdownwardsaresuchandsuch.Suppose furtherthatonthepackbeingexaminedB'sclaimsarefoundtobecorrect.Supposealso,ofcourse,that therehasbeennocollusionbetweenAandB.Insuchacasethesuccessescouldnotreasonablybe assignedeithertochance,ortotelepathyfromA,whohadnonormalknowledgeoftheorderofthecards. Whattheoperativefactorwouldbeishardtoexplainbyreferencetoanynormalandgenerallyaccepted senseoffaculty.Clairvoyanceisaconvenientlabel,evenifthederivationofthewordsuggestsanunreal analogywiththeordinarypowerofsight. "Precognition"isthewordgenerallyappliedtooccurrencesinwhichthereappearstobesomeanticipation offutureeventsnotduetochancenorbasedoninferencefromnormalknowledge.Hereagainthederivation ofthewordistosomeextentmisleading.Theanticipationmayshowitselfbyconductsuchasaperson wouldnottakeunlessheknewwhatwasgoingtohappen,althoughthereisnoevidencetoshowthathein factknewit.Itmightbeareasonableinferencefromhisactionthatsubconsciouslyhedidknowit.Soagain inexperimentsincardguessing,ifapercipientmakesasignificantproportionofhitsnotonthetarget coincidingintimewithhisguess,butonthenexttargettothat,precognitionhardlyseemstheappropriate wordforthatkindofdisplacement Thelackofexactknowledgeofthescopeandlimitsoftelepathymakesitdifficultenoughtojudgewhether itisareasonableexplanationofamessagethroughamediumconveyingveridicalinformationnotwithinthe medium'snormalknowledge.Butwearenotwhollywithoutguidanceonthesematters,asthereisamass ofevidenceabouttelepathyreachingusfromhundredsofspontaneousexperiencesandfromexperiments bothqualitativeandquantitative.Butwithprecognitionandclairvoyancewearenotsowellplaced.Our knowledgeofclairvoyanceisderivedfromaveryfewexperiments,andofprecognitionfrominstancesof "displacement"incardexperiments,ifthatphenomenonistobeconsideredprecognitive,supportedbya fewspontaneouscaseswherethefactsarewellestablished,butwhereotherexplanations,suchaschance ornormalinference,arepossible.Mediumisticcommunicationbeingessentiallyabilateralormultilateral affair,itislesslikelytobeaffectedbyfacultiesoflivingmindssuchasclairvoyanceandprecognition,which donotinvolvemorethanasinglemind,thanbytelepathywhereatleasttwo,andpossiblymore,mindsare concerned.Inthechaptersthatfollowsomecommunicationswillbediscussedinwhichfacultiesseemto havebeenoperative,notentirelyunlikeclairvoyanceandprecognitionasshowninexperimentswithliving subjects,butyetnotapparentlyquitethesame.ThetermGESP(GeneralExtrasensoryPerception)is sometimesappliedtoasituationwherethefactsseemtoshowthatsomeparanormalfacultyhasbeenat workbutarenotsufficienttodefinewhetherthatfacultyistelepathy,clairvoyanceorprecognition.Butthe evidencefrommediumshipmayrequiregivingGESPamoreextendedmeaning,toincludeanotherfaculty, orotherfaculties,withpowersthatdonotcoincidewithanyofthethree.

    Chapter12:CommunicationsThroughMediums III:LimitedScopeoftheseCausesandFaculties
    W.H.Salter TOAPPRECIATEthepresentpositionofthesurvivalproblemasaffectedbyESPitisusefulto glancebackwardseveralyearsbeforetheexperimentstoexcludetelepathymentionedinthepreceding chapterhadbeendevised.TheemergenceoftheG.P.ControlinthePipermediumship,andRichard Hodgson'sstudyofit,producedforthefirsttimeamassofmaterialthatraisedanapparentlyclearcutissue betweentelepathyandcommunicationfromthedead.ThesuddendeathinNewYorkin1892ofPellew (calledGeorgePelhamorG.P.intherecords)hasbeenmentionedinChapterIX.Hehadbeenafriend, thoughnotaparticularlyclosefriend,ofHodgsonandwithinafewweeksofhisdeathcommunications claimingtocomefromhimwerebeingreceivedthroughMrs.PiperbyfriendsofhisaboutwhomHodgson believedMrs.Pipertoknownothing. HodgsonwasatthistimeingeneralchargeofthePipersittings.Intendingsitterswereintroducedbyhim, hekeptrecordsofwhatpassedatthesittings,andheverifiedthemessagesgivenasfarashecouldobtain thesitters'cooperation,whichwasnotalwaysveryfreelyextended.Hisnaturalhabitofmindwassceptical, asheshowedinhisinvestigationof"physicalphenomena"inEngland,andoftheBlavatskyphenomenain India.Hemustthereforebecredited,intheabsenceofevidencetothecontrary,withhavingtakenthe obviousprecautionstopreservethesittedanonymity,topreventleakage,andtocheckuponthepossibility thatMrs.Piperhad,howeverinnocently,obtainedinformationaboutthemandtheirfriends.Thatisnotof coursetoclaimthathisinferencesbasedontheannotatedrecordsofthesittingswereofnecessity infallible. HisreportonthisstageofthePipermediumshipoccupiesaboutthreehundredpages(284582)ofVol.XIII ofSPRProceedings ,andincludestwosectionstotallingfiftypages(357406)ontherespectivemeritsofthe telepathicandspiritistichypotheses,inwhichhearguesstronglyinfavourofthelatter.Somepartsofhis argumentnoonewouldprobablychallenge,as,forinstance,hisclaimthatthetelepathichypothesis requires"anextensionoftelepathybetweenonelivingpersonandanotherfarbeyondwhatwehavebeen abletoproduceexperimentally".Thatwasthen,andstillis,trueevenifexperimentswith"free"materialare takenintoaccountalongwiththoseofthequantitativekind.Thepresenceinallexperimentsofaknown consciousagentinitselfdividesthemsharplyfromcommunicationsthroughmediumsinmanyofwhich somelivingagentmaybeassumed,ifwesowish,butnonecanbeidentified. Afterpointingout(l).328)theextraordinaryabilityshownbyMrs.PiperduringtheperiodoftheG.P.Control todistinguishbetweensitterswhohadbeenknowntoG.P.duringhislife,andsitterswhohad,not,from amongaboutonehundredandfiftypersonswhohadhadanonymoussittingswithher,Hodgsonspeaks(p. 330)oftheexhibitionatsittingswitholdfriendsofmemories "suchaswouldnaturallybeassociatedaspartoftheG.P.personality,whichcertainlydonot suggestinthemselvesthattheyoriginateotherwise,andwhichareaccompaniedbythe emotionalrelationswhichwereconnectedwithsuchfriendsinthemindofG.P.living." Laterinthesamesectionhearguesthatfromthesuccessesandfailuresshownwithvarioustypesof informationconveyedinthecommunicationsitispossibletoformanopinionastothesourceofthe information,whethertheallegedCommunicatorsor"Mrs.Piper'spercipientpersonality".Hesumsupthis partofhisargumentthus(pp.392,393): "Ingeneralthenwemaysaythatthereareontheonehandvariouslimitations inthe informationshownthroughMrs.Piper'strance,whichareprimafacieexplicableonthe assumptionthatitcomesfromtheallegedCommunicators,andforwhichwecanfindno correspondinglimitationsinthemindsoflivingpersonsontheotherhand,thatthereare variousselectionsofinformationgiveninconnectionwithparticularCommunicators,whichare intelligibleifregardedasmadebytheallegedCommunicatorsthemselves,butforwhich discriminationthereisnosatisfactoryexplanationtobefoundbyreferringthemtoMrs.Piper's personality."

    Thelastfewwords,iftheystoodbythemselves,mightsuggestthatHodgsonhadoverlookedthepointthat thedividinglinewasnotbetweentheCommunicatorsandtheessentialMrs.Pipersotospeak,butbetween themand,ashemorecorrectlyputsitafewlineslower,"themindsoflivingpersonsactinguponMrs. Piper'spercipientpersonality". Hodgsonadmitsinthesameparagraphthatthereisnotsufficientevidencetojustifyaclaimtocertaintyfor hisconclusion,andinfactthepresenceasafactorintheproblemofsuchavariablequantityas"theminds oflivingpersons"detractsheavilyfromtheforceofhisargument.The"livingpersons"mustbetakenas includingatthelowestestimateallMrs.Piper'ssittersduringtheperiodoftheG.P.Control,andthese numberedaboutonehundredandfifty.Experiencehasshownthatsomepeoplemakemuchbettersitters thanothers,andthatthedifferencebearslittlerelation,ifany,totheclosenessoftheirfriendshipwiththe Communicatorfromwhomtheyseekmessages,ortheeffectivenessofthesameCommunicatorwithother sitters. Thestrongpropensityofthesubconscious,illustratedinapreviouschapter,todramatisematerialcoming, orappearingtoittocome,fromanoutsidesource,makesitnaturalthatmediumsshouldprefertoclothe themessagestheyaregivingintrappingsappropriatetotherealorsupposedCommunicatorratherthanto presentthemtothesitterasunadornedstatements.Thisholdstruewhetherinfactthesubstanceofthe messageisamemorylatentinthemedium'ssubconscious,orisatelepathicimpressionfromsomeother livingperson,orcomes,ifthatpossibilitybeadmitted,fromthesurvivingintelligenceofapersonnowdead. Thesuccessofthedramatisationvariesimmenselyfrominstancetoinstance.Mrs.Piper'sG.P.Control impressedhisfriendsandherMyersControlwasalsoonoccasionsimpressive.Mrs.Willett'sGurney Controlseemstohavebeenmostlifelike,althoughshehadnevermetGurneywhenalive.G.W.Balfour, whohadknownhimwell,wasgreatlystruckbyit,inparticularbythereproductionofhissomewhat boisteroushumourandfondnessforpuns.Again,allwhoknewA.W.Verrallwell,asIwasfortunateenough todo,andhavereadBalfour'sreportontheEarofDionysiuscase(Proc .XXIX197243),havebeenstruckby theamazingfidelityofthecommunicationstoVerrall'smannerofspeechandwriting.Mrs.Willett'spersonal knowledgeofhimwasoftheslightest,thoughdoubtlessshehadheardhimdescribedbyhiswifeandsome ofhisfriends.OfGurneytoo,whohadbeendeadtwentyyearswhenherautomatismbegan,shemusthave learntsomethingfromBalfourandothers.Butinanycasethisisnotthesortofevidencethatcanbe expectedtocarrymuchweightexceptwiththeCommunicator'sfriends. Thatistruealsoofwhatisperhapsanevenmoreremarkablefact.Somemediumsareabletogivelong seriesofsittings,extendingitmaybeoverseveralyears,inwhichmessagesarereceivedbysittersfroma Communicatorwellknowntothembutquiteunknowntothemedium,muchthatistypicalbothinmatter andmannerbeingreceived,andnothingoutofcharacterbeingsaidatanysittingfrombeginningtoend. Oneverydistinctivethingaboutmostpeopleistheirsenseofhumour,thedegreeinwhichtheyhaveit,the partitplaysintheirtalk,itsmanner,andthesortofsubjectswhichprovokeit.SeveralofMrs.Leonard's regularsittershavecommentedontheabilityofherCommunicatorstomaketherightkindofjokesabout therightthings,whileneverputtingafootwrongwithuncharacteristicjestorinappropriatesolemnity.A scepticmightarguethatallowancemustbemadenotonlyfortelepathyfromthesitter,butforhintsasto theCommunicator'spersonalityunintentionallydroppedatsittingshemightalsodoubtwhetherthe resemblancewasreallyascloseasthesitterthought,citingasaparalleltheabsurd"recognitions"of fraudulent"extras"in"spiritphotography".ThisargumentwouldcarrymoreweightwithmeifIhadnot knownhowcarefulandcriticalmanyofMrs.Leonard'ssitterswere. AfewweeksafterMyers'sdeathinJanuary1901,hisfriendandneighbour,Mrs.Verrall,beganwriting automatically.Shewasatthistimenobelieverinsurvival,butwasgreatlyimpressedbythefervourofhis beliefandwishedtogivehimanopportunityofcommunicating,ifhewereabletodoso.Bythe5thMarch shehadgotpasttheinitialstageofmerescrawls.Herscriptswereanoddjumbleofwords,phrasesand quotationsinseverallanguages,English,GreekandLatinpredominating.Superficiallytheyappeared meaningless,butmethodicalstudyofthemastheyprogressedshowedthat,ifonescriptwascompared withanother,ameaningfulpatterncouldbefoundthatcoveredlargepartsofthescripts,apatternclear enoughinplaces,butconfusedinothers. Herhusband,A.W.Verrall,wasnotgreatlyinterestedinpsychicalresearch,butknewthattherehadbeen muchdiscussionastohowfarostensiblecommunicationsfromthedeadcouldbeaccountedforby telepathyfromtheliving.HeaccordinglyresolvedtotestMrs.Verrall'sscriptsforpossibletelepathyfrom him.Hisplan,whichheformedinApril1901hecouldnotlaterremembertheexactdateinthatmonthwas

    tothinkofthreewordsfromaGreekplayhavingaspecialassociationforhimbutunknown,ashebelieved, toanyoneelse.HedidnottellMrs.VerrallofhisplanthenorbeforeOctober1902,butscannedherscripts tonotewhethertheyshowedanysignofbeinginfluencedbythesewords. Thewords,takenfromElectra'slament,inEuripides'sOrestes (1.1004),were***.Thesecondandthird wordsmean"towardsthedawn",butthemeaningofthefirstwordisdebatable.Thefirsthalfcertainly means"one"or"alone",thesecondmightmean"horse",ifonlythatmadesense.Thecontextdescribes theportentsthataccompaniedthefeudintheHouseofPelops,howthesunandthestarschangedtheir courses.Verrall'spersonalassociationwiththephrasewasthatthepassageofwhichitformspartwasset inaCambridgeexamination,andthatimmediatelyaftertheexaminationheandtwofriends,bothdeadlong before1901,haddiscusseditsmeaning.Oneofthemhadjokinglysuggested"Aonehorsedawn"asa possibletranslation,andthisabsurdphrasehasstucktotheexperiment,whichisreportedinProc .XX.
    ***Unfortunately,wecurrentlyunabletoreproduc eGreekletters.

    ThethreetargetwordsneverappearedinMrs.Verrall'sscript,butapproachestothem,ofpossible significance,werenotedalongthreelines:(1)theappearanceofseveralotherwordsbeginningin*****on whichemphasisseemedtobelaid,(2)referencetodawn,(3)referencestoreversalsinthecourseofNature similarinageneralwaytothosedescribedbyElectra.Theconvergenceofthesethreelinesmadean arguable,ifnotentirelyconclusive,caseforherscripthavingbeentelepathicallyinfluencedbyherhusband's plan.Threeideashadcmergedwhichwereallimplicitinthetargetphraseandmustthereforehavebeenin Verrall'sthoughtswhiletheexperimentwasinprogress.Thepartialsuccessoftheexperimenthasinfact beenusedtosupporttheargumentthatatelepathicimpressionmaybedisguisedasacommunicationfrom thedead,forthescriptspurportedtobeinspiredbyMyersandhisfriends. SothematterstooduntilafterVerrall'sdeathin1912andMrs.Verrall'sin1916.Butin1917Piddington, whowasworkingoverthelargemassofscriptsof"theS.P.R.group"withanacumenequalledonlybyhis industry,wasledtolookupanoteofJebbsinhiseditionofSophocles'OedipusTyrannus ,inwhichJebb discussestheuseandmeaninginGreektragedyofcompoundadjectivesthefirstelementofwhichisa wordimplyingnumber.AfterseveralexamplestakenfromSophoclesandEuripides,Jebbendsthenote, "SoIunderstandEur.Or.1004***'Eoswhodriveshersteedsalone'(whenthemoonandstarshave disappearedfromthesky)."Jebbtakesthefirstthreeexamplesofcompoundwordsofthistypefrom OedipusColoneus .PiddingtonanalysestwentyscriptswrittenbyMrs.Verrallbetweenthe10thApril1901, bywhichtime,ifnotearlier,hebelievestheexperimenttohavebegun,andthe31stMay1902,andargues, correctlyinmyview,thattherearerepeatedreferencestoOedipus,theblindwandererofthatplay,andin particularreferencestoeachofthethreepassagesfromitquotedinJebb'snote.Headds, "ImaintainthatoneofthemainobjectsoftheintelligenceresponsiblefortheOneHorseDawn scriptswastorefertoJebb'snoteandtoindicatetherebythewords***(Proc .XXX175229 and296305) AsVerrallhadread,andreviewed,Jebb'seditionoftheOedipusTyrannus whenitwaspublishedin1887,it isconceivablethatheretainedasubconsciousmemorythatJebbhadillustratedthemeaningofthefirst wordofthetargetphrasefromtheOrestes bythreesupposedparallelsfromtheOedipusColoneus .Ifthen thesetwentyscriptsaretobebroughtwithintheframeworkofVerrall'sexperiment,itmustbesupposed thathissubconsciouswascapableofinfluencinghiswife'sscriptsinthedirectiondesiredbyhisconscious mind,whichhoweverduringtheeighteenmonthswhenitwascarefullyscanningherscriptsasthey appearednevergaveanysignofrecognisingwhatwashappening.Theprocessinvolved,ifitistobecalled telepathic,meansthatthesimplenotionofthoughttransferencefromwhichtheearlypsychicalresearchers started,oranythatcouldnowbesupportedbytheevidencefromquantitativeexperiment,hasbeenleftfar behind. Buttherewasamorecuriouscomplicationtofollow.Onthe31stMarch1901,thatisbeforeVerrallhad devisedhisexperiment,Mrs.Verrallwroteascriptcontainingthefollowingwords,"praecoxoleabaccis Sabinisponeturdisadjuvantibus ",whichmaybetranslated"theearly(1)olivewithSabineberrieswillbe plantedwiththehelpoftheGods".Thementionof"Sabineberries"showsittobeanallusiontoapassage ofJuvenal.ThisisquotedbyJebbinanoteonachorusinOedipusColoneus ,inpraiseoftheolive, Athena'sgifttohercity,andthischorusinitsturnisquiteunmistakablyalludedtobyscriptsofMrs.Verrall writtenwhiletheexperimentwasinprogress.Herscriptthereforeof31stMarch1901lookslikethefirst stepinthesolutionofatestthathadnotyetbeenplanned.

    (1)Moreexactly"ripebeforeitstime".

    ItispossiblethatVerrall'smemorywasatfaultandthathehad"devised",oratanyrateruminatedon "devising",hisexperimentearlierthanheatalatertimesupposed,andthatintheprocesshehad subconsciouslyappreciatedtheappropriatenessofthenotesofJebbwhichhavebeenmentioned. Piddingtonhowevermentionsanotherhypothesiswhich,hesays, "Iamnotdisposedtopress,butwhichshouldnotbeentirelyignored.ItisthatDr.Verrallwas nottherealoriginatoroftheexperiment,butthathecarriedoutanexperimentwhich,though hedidnotknowit,anotherintelligencehaddevisedandimposeduponhim." Headdsthatthishypothesis,liketheothershediscusses,isincapableofproof.Itseemstometohaveat leastonepointinitsfavour,thatitgivesrelevancetothescriptwords"praecox"and"disadjuvantibus ",iftoo exactatranslationofthemisnotpressed.Forthepresent"Iamnotdisposed"togofurtherthanto emphasisethat,whenostensiblecommunicationsfromthedeadareexplainedasexamplesofthe paranormalfacultiesoftheliving,thosefacultieshaveawayofassumingunusualandsurprisingshapes. (SeeProc .XSXIV159165.) AsearlyasthePipersittingsintheninetiesitbecameclearthatamongpossibleexplanationsoftrue messagesreceivedthroughhermediumshipmustbereckoned,besidesofcoursechanceandinference fromfactsnormallyknowntoherwheretheseseemedrelevant,telepathyfromthesitterandalsofromsome otherpersonwithwhomthemediumhadnodirectcontact,sincefactswerecorrectlystatedatsittings whichthesittercouldnotverifyfromhisownknowledge.Thiswasapossibilitythatrequiredexploring,and ledtothedevelopmentofatechniqueofproxysittingsbyMissNeaWalker,Lodge'ssecretary,andtheRev. C.DraytonThomas.Theessenceofthetechniquewasthatthesitterinchargeofthesittingshouldknow verylittleindeedaboutthedesiredCommunicatororthefriendswishingtoget.intouchwithhim,should recordtheextentofhisknowledge,andshouldonlypassontothemediumortheControltheminimumof information(alsoofcourserecorded)sufficienttoenabletheControltoselecttherightCommunicatorfrom anyotherswithwhomtheControlmightheintouch. Thistechnique,ifitdidnothingelse,wouldatleastbeeffectiveinrestrictingtothefewfactsknowntothe sitterthemedium'sorControl'spowerofdrawingcorrectinferencesfromthesitter'sspeech,appearanceor gestures.Telepathyfromthesitterwouldberestrictedinthesameway.Thechoice,itwasargued,was thereforenarroweddowntochance(anunsatisfactoryexplanationwherethefactswereunusual),telepathy fromtheCommunicator'sfriends,ormessagesfromtheCommunicatorhimself.Asbetweenthesetwolast, theslendernessoftherapportbetweentheCommunicator'sfriendsandthemediumorControl,depending asitdidsolelyontheminimalinformationpassedonbythesitter,whiletheoreticallynotconclusiveagainst thehypothesisofremotetelepathy,seemedtotellstronglyagainstit. Andinmyviewenoughsuccesshasbeenachievedthroughthistechnique(1)torenderinadequateasan explanationanyconceptionoftelepathybasedontheresultsofquantitativeexperiment,orregardedasa simpleonewaytransmissionofthoughtsfromasingleagenttoasinglepercipient.Iftheissuereallylay betweencommunicationfromthedeadassofardiscussedinthisbook,andtelepathyassoconceived,I shouldgivethepreferencetotheformeralternative.Enoughhasalreadybeensaidforthepresentin criticismofthatviewoftelepathy.Adifferentviewofsurvivalwillbepresentedlater,butbeforethattwoother modesofextrasensoryperception,precognitionandclairvoyance,mustbeexamined.Caneitherofthem, asafacultyoflivingpersons,accountforwhatpurporttobecommunicationsfromthedead?
    (1)SeeMissWalker'sbook,ThroughaStranger'sHands,andthec asesreportedbyDraytonThomasinSPRProceedings(e.g.,XLIII, 439andXLV,257).

    Theevidenceforprecognitionasafacultyoflivingmindsisslight,ifoneleavesoutofaccountthevery curiousphenomenonofforwarddisplacementincardguessingexperiments,thatis,thecorrectguessing notofthecontemporarytarget,butofthenext,ornextbutone,succeedingtarget.Aconsiderableamount ofevidencecannowbequotedinsupportofthisoddsortofoccurrencebutithaslittleapparentaffinitywith whatweallmeanbyprediction. Thequestionofthescopetobeallowedtonormallyacquiredknowledgeandinferenceisevenmore troublesomeinthisconnectionthanincasesofapparentspontaneoustelepathy.Predictionsmoreover,

    fromthedaysofDelphion,havebeennotoriousforseldomsayingaplainthinginaplainway,orspecifying thetimewithinwhichfulfilmentistobeexpected.Thisistruewhetherornotthepredictionsclaimtobe inspiredbydiscarnateintelligences. AscepticwhocriticisedontheselinestheforecastsofpubliceventsfoundinthescriptsoftheSPRgroup ofautomatistsbysomeoftheinterpreters(seePiddington'spaperinProc .XXXIII)couldmakeoutafairly strongcase.ItistruethatatleastoneofthemostnotableincidentsoftheFirstWorldWar,thesinkingof theLusitania,isreferredtobyoneoftheautomatistsinascriptwrittenbeforethewarbegan,butseveralof thepassagesPiddingtonquotes,thoughwarlikeinphrasing,weretakeninametaphoricalsensebythe writers,whoseviewofthemmayafterallhavebeenthetrueone.Forotherforecastsofamoreagreeable kindnodateoffulfilmentwassuggested,andtheystillremainnomorethanapioushope.Asexamples thereforeofprecognition,theycannotbearmuchweight.Thesescriptsarehoweverofgreatinterestin anotherway,asinstancesofthepersistenceoveralongperiodofatrainofthoughtinthesubconscious mindsofagroupofpersonswho,intheirconsciousminds,differedconsiderablyamongstthemselvesin opinionandtemperament.Piddington'sintroductiontohispaperisaveryvaluableexpositionofthe techniqueforinterpretingamassofhighlycomplex,highlyallusivematerial. Thereareindeedafewinterestingspontaneouscasesofapparentforeknowledgethepig,whomthebishop's wifedreamtshewouldfindstandingbythesideboardinthebreakfastroom,andtherehewas,has deservedlyattainedpopularfamebutingeneral,theevidenceforprediction,whetherasafacultyofthe living,oraspurportingtooriginatewithdiscarnateintelligences,issoslightthatadiscussionastowhether thesecondcanbedistinguishedfromthefirstislessprofitableintheexistingstateofourknowledge,than adisputewouldatpresent(October1960)heastowhetherYetisareorarenotmembersofthehuman species,sincetherearesufficientauthentichumanbeingstoserveasstandardsofcomparison. Forclairvoyance,asdefinedinChapterXI,thereisenoughexperimentalevidencetomakeitworthwhileto considerthepossiblebearingofthisfacultyaspossessedbylivingpeopleontheproblemofsurvival.The Polishmedium,Ossowiecki,wasabletoreadthecontentsofsealedenvelopesunderconditionswhich criticalexperimentersconsideredfraudproof.Thusin1923hecorrectlydescribedadesigndrawnbyDr. Dingwallandenclosedbyhimintheinnermostofthreeopaqueenvelopes.Thepacketwaspresentedto OssowieckiatasittingatwhichDingwallwasnotpresent,andwhenDingwallreceiveditbackafterwardshe wassatisfiedthatithadnotbeentamperedwith.Acriticwhowasscepticalastoclairvoyancebutprepared togiveaverywidescopetotelepathy,couldnodoubtexplainsuchanincidentasaninstanceofthelatter faculty. SuchacriticwouldhoweverbehardputtoittoexplaintheMartinStribicexperimentsinAmerica,inwhich inover90,000trialsduringthreeyearsasubjectconsistentlyobtainedhighscoresincorrectlyguessingthe orderofcardsinpacksshuffledandcutbyoneoftheinvestigatorsandplaceddownwardsonatableoutof thesubject'ssight.Thepacksweretheordinarypacksof25Zenercardswithfivesimplegeometrical diagrams,sothatchancewouldbeexpectedtogivefivehitsapack.Thesubject'saveragewasnearly seven,theoddsagainstchanceinanexperimentofthismagnitudejustifyingthedescriptionof "astronomical".Thoughtherehasbeensomecriticismoftheexperiments,theyare,Ithink,generally accepted. Resultssomathematicallyamazingarenottobeexpectedincommunicationsfromdiscarnateminds,but astonishingresultshavecomefromexperimentsofanotherkind,fromthebooktests,forinstance,obtained throughMrs.Leonard'smediumship.Mrs.Sidgwickinthemostimportantpublisheddiscussionofthem Proc .XXXI,241400)describesthemas "attemptsbyMrs.Leonard'sControlFedatoindicatethecontentsofaparticularpageofa particularbookwhichMrs.Leonardhasnotseenwithherbodilyeyes,andwhichisnot,atthe timeofthesitting,knowntothesitter." Theanalysisoftheseattemptswascomplicatedbythedifficultyinmanycasesofbeingcertainastowhich pageofwhichbookFedawastryingtoindicate,andbydoubtsastowhetherFeda'sdescriptionofthe supposedcontentsreallyfitted.ThelengthofMrs.Sidgwick'sreportislargelyduetoherdetailed discussionoftheseuncertainties.Inthethreeinstances1amabouttosummariseIhaveforthesakeof brevityomittedallthispartofherdiscussion,leavingittothereaderwhomayhaveanydoubtsanthese pointstosatisfythembyconsultingherreport.

    TherecanbenoreasonabledoubtthatinnoneofthesethreecasesMrs.Leonardhadoreverhadhadany normalknowledgeofthecontentsoftheparticularpageofthebookindicatedbyFeda.Inthefirstcasethe existenceofthebookwasunknowntoherintheothertwo,iftheexistencewasknownthepositionwas not.IfthereforeFeda'sdescriptionofthecontentsofaparticularpagewascorrect,thesuccesswasdue eithertochance,ortoknowledgeparanormallyacquiredfromsomeothermind,ortoherownclairvoyant powers.Innoneofthesethreecasesdoestheresultseemtomecapableofbeingattributedwithany plausibilitytochance. TheyconforminthisrespecttothegeneralrunofLeonardbooktests,sinceinacontrolexperimentwith fictitiousbooktests(Proc .XXXIII)theproportionofcompleteandpartialsuccesseswaslessthanasixthof thoseinMrs.Sidgwick'sreport.Inallcomparisonsofqualitativeresults,howevercarefullyanalysed, subjectivejudgmentsruleoutmathematicalprecision,butthecaseagainstchanceasanadequate explanationofthesuccessfulLeonardbooktestsisoverwhelming. Inthefirstcase(Proc .XXXI,253)ananonymoussitter(Mrs.Talbot)receivedthroughFedaamessagefrom herhusbandaskinghertolookonpagetwelveorthirteenofabookshedescribedforsomethingwrittenthat wouldbesointerestingaftertheirconversationatthesitting.Fedadescribedthebookasnotbeingprinted, buthavingwritinginit,asbeingdarkincolour,andashavingatableoflanguages,IndoEuropean,Aryan, Semitic,Arabianbeingspecified,withadiagramoflinesgoingoutfromacentre.Shealsoindicatedthe sizeasbeingabout8to10inchesby4or5.Mrs.Talbotcouldnotthinkofanybookofthekind,andonher returnhomespokeofthemediumtalkingalotofrubbishaboutabook.Shewashoweverpersuadedto makeasearchandatthebackofatopshelffoundashabbyblackleathernotebookofherhusband's,of aboutthesizespecifiedbyFeda.Therewasalongfoldedpieceofpaperpastedinitwhichhadononeside thewords"TableofSemiticorSyroArabianLanguages",andontheotheradiagramasdescribedandthe words"GeneralTableoftheAryanandIndoEuropeanLanguages".Onpage13wasanextractfromabook, PostMortem,inwhichamandescribeshissensationsimmediatelybeforeandafterdeath. AlthoughMrs.Talbotwaspositivethatshehadneverseenthebookbefore,andalthoughhersightofthe contents,thediagraminparticular,didnotreviveanymemoriesofhavingseenit,thepossibilityoflatent memoryonherpart,andtelepathyfromhersubconsciouscannotbedisregarded.Norcandirect clairvoyancebythemedium,inviewoftheresultsoftheOssowieckiandMartinStribicexperiments.In thosecases,however,thethingstobereadwereshowntothesubject,thoughnotinawaythatwould enablehimtoreadthem,whileintheTalbotcasethebookwastuckedawayinahousenotknowntothe medium. Directclairvoyance,evenoftheOssowieckitype,issooddastoprovokemuchincredulity,andtheTalbot case,ifanexampleofit,imposesastillgreaterstrainonourpowersofbelief,butevensoitisquite inadequatebyitselftoaccountforotheroftheLeonardbooktests.Forexample,severalGreekbookswere lentbymywife(H.V.)toLadyTroubridgeandMissRadclyffeHall,andplacedbythemonashelfinanorder knownonlytothem.Greekisalanguageunknowntoeitherofthem,ortoMrs.Leonard,ortothe Communicator,A.V.B.,whois,however,statedtobehelpedsometimesbyotherCommunicators,including A.W.Verrall. Atthesittingofthe30thOctober1918,describedinProc .XXXIpp.301309,oneoftheGreekbookswas indicated,thefirstvolumeoftheOxfordtextofThucydides.Pages2and4werementionedanditwassaid thatonpage2therewasanallusiontoAsia,andthatthebooktooktheCommunicatorbackfarmorethan 2,000years:Fedaspokethreetimesofimitation,andsaidshegotheaddressesofsomepeculiarkind,and alsosomeratherextraordinarymannerofdressingthehair,ornotdressingit.Thefirstfewpagesof Thucydides'textinthisedition(inwhichthepagesarenotnumbered)dealwiththeearlyhistoryofGreece, thesecondpagementioningtheTrojanWar.Onthefourthpageitissaidthattheleadingmeninthe wealthyclassatAthenshaduntilshortlybeforehisdaytieduptheirhairintopknotsfastenedwithgolden cicadas,andthattheleadingIonianshadadoptedthesamestyle.Therearethusfourpointsof correspondencebetweenthecommunicationandthepagesspecifiedAsia,aperiodfarmorethan2,000 yearsago,anextraordinarymannerofdressingthehair,andimitation. Atthesamesittingthesittersweretoldtoturntoaspecifiedpageneartheendofthebook,andthatatthe verybottomofthatpagetherewasjustaword,"Ithinkit'sonlyoneword,"thattheCommunicator particularlywishedthem"Justnow,justlately".Onthelastlineofthepageinquestion(BookIV,Section 123)istheGreekwordforarmistice.Atthedateofthesitting,theendofthefightingintheFirstWorldWar wasalreadyexpected,thearmisticebeingsignedelevendayslater.

    DirectclairvoyancefromMrs.Leonardisofnohelphere.Sheneitherknewwherethebookwasnorcould havereaditifithadlainopenbeforeher.Thesittersknewwherethebookwas,butcouldnotreadGreek. Mywife,whoknewGreek,didnotknowwherethebookwas,norcouldshereasonablyhesupposedto haveknownonwhatpage,andwhatlineofthatpage,mentionofanarmisticeoccurs.Someformof paranormalactivitymustbepostulatedotherthandirectclairvoyancebyitself,ordirecttelepathywhether betweenmediumandsitterorbetweenmediumandmywifewholentthebook. In1919mywifehadasittingwithMrs.LeonarddescribedinProc .XXXI286289.Inpreparationforthenext booktestthatmightbegivenIhadsomeweekspreviouslyplacedonashelfinanunusedroominour housearowofbooks,sometakenfromothershelvesinthehouse,andsomenewlyboughtbymein Londonandnotseenbymywifebeforethesitting.ShedidnotentertheroomafterIhadputthebooks thereanddidnotknowwhatbookswerethereorinwhatordertheystood.Withaprecisionthatshedidnot alwaysattainFedaindicatedunmistakablynotonlytheparticularbook,HenryJames'sDaisyMiller(Nelson edition)butthepage(15)andtheexactplaceonthepage(1/4inchabovehalfwaydown).There,itwas said,wouldbefound"awordorwordswhichwillformacrosscorrespondence""alongpolehe(i.e.the Communicator,A.W.Verrall)ispretendingtoshowmealong,longpoleinhishand". Inthemiddleofpage15andbeginningjustabovethemiddleoccurthesewords: "Ishouldliketoknowwhereyougotthatpole,"shesaid. "Iboughtit!"respondedRandolph. The"pole"inquestionwasanalpenstock,describedonanotherpageas"alongalpenstock".Thewordsdid notformpartofanycrosscorrespondence,butthepassagehadanassociationwithcross correspondencesappropriatetomywife.Shehadafewyearspreviouslybegunexperimentsintelepathy withMrs.StuartWilson,andthesehadproducedcrosscorrespondences.Mrs.Wilsonhadjokinglygiven thenameRandolphtotheintelligenceresponsibleforhershareinthem(orhernominalshare,forshefelt herconsciousmindwasnotresponsible),afterthetiresomesmallboyinDaisyMiller,whosefamilycould notliveuptohim.Thisfactwasknowntomywifeandme,butnottoMrs.Leonard.Iwastheonlyperson withnormalknowledgeofwhatbooksstoodontheshelf.IfFeda'ssuccesswasduetoherhaving telepathicallytappedmymind,itmustbeassumedthatInotonlyremembered,subconsciously,thatDaisy Milleroccupiedaparticularplaceontheshelf,whichdoesnotseemtomeabsolutelyincredible,butthatI retainedasubconsciousmemoryofthepageonwhich,andthepartofthepagewhereRandolphandhis "pole"werementioned.ThisIfindhardtobelieve,asIhadnotreadthebookforalongtime.Hereisanother casewhere,whateverexplanationwillsuffice,plain,straightforwardclairvoyancefromthemediumwillnot. Nor,forthatmatter,wouldplain,straightforwardclairvoyancefromaCommunicatorwhohadsurvivedbodily death.Butonehasnorighttoassumethataparanormalfacultycapableofbeingexercisedbypersonsin thebody,whethertelepathy,orclairvoyanceoranyother,would,ifexercisablebydiscarnateintelligences, onlyoperateinjustthesamewayandwithoutanymodification. Manypeoplehaveleftbehindthemscaledenvelopeswithmessagesinside,andwithdirectionsthatthe envelopeshouldonlyheopenedif,intheopinionofthepersonwithwhomtheenvelopehasbeendeposited, atrustworthymediumhasrevealedthecontents.Ifthedepositorisatallwellknown,therearelikelytobea numberofclaimstohavereceivedcommunicationsfromhimastowhatthecontentsare.Oncethe envelopeisopened,thetestbecomesofnovalue,exceptpossiblyasatestoftelepathyfromtheopener, whoseembarrassmentastowhenheoughttoopenitisthereforegreat. Idonotknowofanyinstanceinwhichaclaimtoknowthecontentshasbeenmadewithcomplete success,butifsuchaninstanceshouldoccur,itwouldnotbeadecisiveproofofsurvival.Theremightbea normalexplanation,chance,forexample,oracorrectinferencebasedonknowledgeoftheCommunicator's habitofmindandhisinterests.Orhisintentiontoleavethatmessagemighthavebeentelepathically graspedduringhislifebyoneofhisfriendsandhaveremainedlatentinthefriend'ssubconsciousmemory. Andsinceinthepresentgenerationexperimentalevidencehasincreasedforclairvoyance,asapowerwhich somelivingpersonscanexercise,allowancemustbemadeforthatfacultyalso. "Posthumous"messagesofthesimplerkindhavethereforefallenoutoffavour,andmorecomplicated schemeshavebeendevisedtoeliminatethesedoubts.Atvarioustimesbetween1930and1933Oliver LodgedepositedwiththeSPRandtheLondonSpiritualistAlliance(asitwasthencalled)severalenvelopes, eachcontainingoneormoreotherenvelopeswithinstructions,nottooeasytofollow,oftheorderandthe

    circumstancesinwhicheachenvelopewastobeopened.Theintentionwasthateachletterwhenopened shouldgiveacluethatwouldbeastimulustoassistamediumtogetthenextcluerightandsoby progressingfromcluetocluetoarriveatthefinalmessage.Lodgediedin1940andwarconditionsmadeit impossibletobeginapplyingthetestforseveralyears.Thisdelaymayhavecontributed,alongwiththe greatcomplexityofthetestitself,totheverysmall,nottosaydoubtful,successattainedasreportedin SPRJournal38,121134. Perhapsahappymeanbetweenthesimplicityoftheoldfashionedposthumoustestandtheexcessive complexityofLodge'sschemeistobefoundinDr.Thouless'sproposaltoleaveashortmessage encipheredandthenreencipheredonthePlayfairsystem.Twokeywordswouldberequiredandwithout knowledgeofthemboththemessageshould,inhisview,defydeciphering.Ifbothkeywordsweregivenina communicationthroughamedium,deciphermentwouldbeeasy,andtherewouldbenodoubtastothe messagedecipheredbeingthatleftbytheCommunicator.Therearehoweverobviousweaknesses.The Communicatormightsurvivehisbodilydeath,buthaveforgottenboththekeywords,oroneofthem,while somefriendofhis,whohadobtainedsubconsciousknowledgeofthemtelepathically,mightrememberthem both. Butsomethingofvaluewouldbegainedbythisscheme,ifthecommunicationmadetheposthumous messageintelligible.Itmightremaindoubtfulhowthekeywasobtained,buttherewouldbenodoubtthatit fittedthelock.Itisthisdoubtwhichhasmadeitimpossibletoclaimmorethanapartialsuccessforthe posthumoustestarrangedbyMyers,andhasevenledtoitsbeingforsometimeregardedasacomplete failure.SeveralyearsbeforehisdeathMyersleftwithLodgeasealedenvelopecontainingamessagein whichhenamedthe"Valley",Hallsteads,Cumberland,astheplacethathewouldwishtorevisitafterdeath, ifhecould.Hediedin1901and,asalreadymentioned,withinafewweeksMrs.Verrallbeganwriting automatically,soastoprovideachannelthroughwhichhemightcommunicate,ifabletodoso. Itwassometimebeforeherscriptmadeadefiniteclaimtoknowledgeofthecontentsofthesealedpacket, butinascriptwrittenonthe13thJuly1904,whichwasquiteunambiguous,shedeclaredthattheenvelope wouldcontaincertainwordsofDiotima,whosediscourseintheSymposiumofPlatoisquotedatsome lengthinMyers'sHumanPersonality(Vol.Ipp.114115).Thatbookhadbeenpublishedin1903,andMrs. Verrall,whohadreadit,wasawarethatthewholeofthatpartofthedialoguehadhadadeepmeaningfor Myersduringhislife. InDecember1904thepacketwasopened,andthecontentsreadout.Thenameoftheplace,Hallsteads, meantnothingtoMrs.Verrall.ThewordsofDiotimawerenotquoted,andtherewasnomentionofthe SymposiumorofPlato.Theexperimentseemedthereforetoherandtonearlyalltheotherpersonspresent, acompletefailure.EnquiryhowevershowedthatindocumentsunpublishedatthetimeofMrs.Verrall's scriptanduntilthenunseenbyherMyershadnotonlydescribedtheValley,Hallsteads,butalsohis associationswithitinPlatoniclanguageofthesamegeneraltenourastheDiotimapassage,andalsothat inMrs.Verrall'searlyscriptswereLatinphrasesappropriatetoMyers'sdescriptionoftheplace.Thesetwo discoverieswhenputtogethersuggestedthatthoughtheexperimentwasinformafailure,itwasmorelikea "nearmiss".Forafulleraccountofthiscomplicatedexperiment,seemypaperinProceedings ,Vol.52. Inmyviewaparanormalhypothesisofsomekindisrequired,andthisisyetanotherinstancewhichcannot beexplainedbyplain,directclairvoyance,asmightconceivablyhavebeenclaimedifthe"posthumous" messagehadshownaverbalcorrespondencewiththescript.

    Chapter13:CrossCorrespondences
    W.H.Salter AWEAKNESSoftheevidenceforsurvivalsofarpresentedisthatevenatitsbest,andwhenthedoubts anddifficultiesraisedbynormalfactors,suchaschanceandlatentmemory,andalsobyparanormalpowersof theliving,telepathyinparticular,havebeenovercome,allthatcouldbeconsideredasestablishedwouldbethat aperson'smemories,orsomeofthem,continuedtoexistwithsomedegreeoforganisedcoherenceafterthe deathofthebody.ReviewingMyers'sHumanPersonalityWalterLeafwrote: "Theevidenceisverystrikingandverystrong.Itproves,Ithink,thatmemoriesofthedeadsurvive, andareunderspecialconditionsaccessibletous.ButIdonotseethatitprovesthesurvivalof whatwecallthelivingspirit,thepersonalityaunitofconsciousness,limitedandselfcontained, acentreofwillandvitalforce,carryingonintoanotherworldtheaspirationsandtheaffectionsof this."(Proc .XVIII,59.) Myershimselfindeedlookedforwardtoevidenceaccruingatsomenottooremotedateof"thewillandvital force"ofdiscarnatepersonalities,forinVol.IIofHumanPersonality(p.274)hewrites: "Wecannotsimplyadmittheexistenceofdiscarnatespiritsasinertorsubsidiaryphenomenawe mustexpecttohavetodealwiththemasagentsontheirownaccount,agentsinunexpected ways,andwithnovelcapacities." ItmaybesignificantthatanewtypeofevidencefirstmakesitsappearancesoonafterMyers'sdeathand ostensiblythroughtheagencyofadiscarnategroupofwhichheisaleader.TheOneHorseDawnexperiment, begunwithinthreemonthsofhisdeath,isanearlyexample.Itcannot,forreasonsalreadyexplained,be consideredacaseofstraightforwardtelepathy.Theanswerisconcealedwithinapatternofextremecomplexity, andapatternimpliesadesigner,whomayconvenientlybecalled"thescriptintelligence",anoncommittal phrasewhichleavesopenforlaterconsiderationwho,orwhat,thescriptintelligenceis,orare. Onenaturallylooksfirsttothesubconsciousofeithertheagent,whoknewthetarget,orofthepercipient,who mayhavegainedsubconsciousknowledgeofitbytelepathyfromhim.Butineithercase,why,insteadofa simpleanddirectanswer,allthisroundaboutelaborationandmystification,whichresultedinthefulldegreeof successonlybeingrecognisedafterbothagentandpercipientweredead,andthenonlythroughPiddington's exceptionalgiftsofindustryandingenuity?Thesubconsciousisnotgenerallysomodestordiffidentastodeny itselftheearlytriumphofarecognisedsuccess,ortoriskthechancethatitssuccessmayneverevenhe recognised.Thatthesubconsciousofbothagentandpercipienthadsomeshareintheresultmaybetakenfor granted.Eitherofthemcouldperhapshaveprovidedallthematerialsusedtoformthepattern,i.e.,the passagesfromGreekliterature,andthenotestoJebb'seditions,butdideitherworkoutthepatterninwhichthe materialswereused? AsimilarproblemarisesinconnectionwithMyers's"posthumous"packet,whererecognitionofthe considerable,thoughincomplete,degreeofsuccessattaineddependedonthecomparisonofseveral documents,somepublished,someunpublished,andonthecuriouscircumstancethatamongthetwentytwo personswhowitnessedtheopeningofthepacket,one(Mrs.Sidgwick)hadsomerecollectionofMyers's connectionwithHallsteads.Therewere,moreover,onlyafewcopiesoftheunpublisheddocumentwhichwasan indispensablelinkbetweenthescriptandthecontentsofthepacket,andshehadaccesstooneofthese.The automatist'ssubconscious,ifnothingmorewereinvolved,seemstohavebeenatimmensepainstodisguisea considerablesuccessasacompletefailure,andtohaveruntheriskofitneverbeingrecognisedasanything else. Theproblemofdesignbecomesstillmoredifficultinrelationtothecrosscorrespondences,whichoccupya largeproportionofthespaceinSPRProceedings from1906on.Thischapterandthenextwillbeoccupiedwith adiscussionofthismostdifficultandinvolvedmatter.Thetroublearisespartlyfromthesheerbulkofthe material,automaticscriptsrunningtomorethantwothousand,andfromthenumberofpersonsconcernedas automatistsandCommunicators,andevenmorefromthequantityoftopicswhichformthesubjectmatter topicswhich,howeverunrelatedtheymayseemtobewhenlookedatsingly,arefoundtobelinkedtogetherin

    theoddestways.Finallythereistheallusivephrasing,consistinglargelyofquotationsinseverallanguages,and theuseofsymbolstodenotebothpersonsandtopics. Ishouldnotattemptthetaskofcondensingthismaterialintotwochapterswereitnotthatthesescriptsare regardedbymanyoftheacuteststudentsofsurvivalevidenceasbeingofthegreatestimportance,andthatup tothepresentfewattemptshavebeenmadetoputtogetherthegistofthenumerousarticlesalreadypublished inProceedings insuchawaythatitcanreadilyheunderstoodbyareaderwithoutpreviousknowledgeofthe subject(1).Therearemoreoversomecorrelationsbetweenthevariousscripts,andbetweenthemandvarious personsandevents,whichhavenotpreviouslybeenmadepublic.


    (1)Saltmarsh'sEvidenceofPersonalSurvivalfromCrossCorrespondences(Bell,1938)deservesthehighestpraise.

    Thepresentchapterwillgoovergroundwhichwouldhavebeenfamiliarenoughtopsychicalresearchers,say, fortyyearsago,butislesssotothepresentgeneration.Thesucceedingchapterbydiscussingnewmaterial mayperhapsgivethematerialalreadypublishedanewaspect,andmakeitspurposeclearer.Inthehopeofnot puttingtooheavyastrainonthereader'spatiencethecasehasbeensimplifiedbycuttingoutseveralsubsidiary topicswhichwouldrequirelongexplanation,butthereisapointbeyondwhichsimplificationinvolvesdistortionI havetriednottoexceedthat. Theessenceofcrosscorrespondencesisthatbetweenthescriptsoftwoormoreautomatistswriting independentlythereisasignificantconnectionthroughbothorallofthemwritingthesamephraseoralludingto thesametopic.Thequalifyingwords"significant"and"independently"areoftheessence.Thereisno significanceintwoorthreepeoplequotingthesamephraseorreferringtothesametopic,ifthephraseortopic isthoroughlycommonplace.Nor,evenwithratherlesscommonplacephraseortopics,ifthescriptsarespread atrandomoveralongperiod,oriftheyarethenaturalproductofacommontrainofthoughtsetgoingbysome stimulusaffectingthemall,someinterestingevent,perhaps,reportedinthenewspapers.Withalittlehelpfrom chancesuchcorrespondenceswouldbeboundtooccur,particularlyinagroupthemembersofwhichhadmuch thesameintellectualbackground.Thepossibilityofsubconscioustelepathicleakagehasalsotobebornein mind. Whenthecrosscorrespondencesbegantobenoticed,carefularrangementsweremadetoensurethatno automatistreceivedrandominformationastothewritingsofanyothermemberofthegroup.Wheresuch informationwasgiven,itwasdonedeliberatelybytheinvestigators,andthefact,withrelevantparticularsasto time,etc.,wascarefullynoted.Therebeingnoquestionastothegoodfaithoftheautomatists,itwasthus possiblefortheinvestigatorstosaywithcertaintywhetheratanygiventimeanymemberofthegrouphadseen aparticularscript,orpartofascript,writtenbyanothermember.Forthesakeofsimplicity,Ishallusetheword "scripts"tocoverallthedocumentarymattercomprisingthecrosscorrespondences,eventhoughthatincludes, besidestheautomaticwritingsofseveralmembersofthegroup,therecordedtranceutterancesofMrs.Piper andlaterofmywifeandMrs:Willett,andtherecordswhichanothermember,Mrs.StuartWilson,madeof impressionsreceivedbyherinastateofslightdissociation.Forthesamereasontheword"automatist"willbe usedtocoverallmembersofthegroup,althoughMrs.Piperwasafamousprofessionalmedium,whose mediumshipwasforthemostpartunconnectedwiththisgroup. ThegroupmaybesaidtohavebeguntofunctionasagroupwhenMrs."Holland"wasdirectedbyherscriptto writetoMrs.VerrallofwhomsheknewnomorethancouldbegatheredfromafewreferencestoherinHuman Personality,inwhichnomentionwasmadeofherautomaticwriting.Mrs."Holland"wasthesisterofRudyard Kiplingandthewifeofanarmyofficer,namedFleming,servinginIndia.In1903,afterreadingHuman Personalityshortlyafteritspublication,shefeltimpelledtoresumethepracticeofautomaticwriting,herearlier attemptsatwhichshehaddiscontinued.Thescriptsshewroteinthelatterpartofthatyearandin1904show severaltracesofapparentlyparanormalknowledgeofsuchthingsasMrs.Verrall'saddressatCambridge,and theGreektextoverthegatewayofSelwynCollege.BothMyersandMrs.VerralllivedneartheCollege,andhe hadoftenexpressedtoherhisscholarlyannoyanceatanerrorinthecarving,sothatareferencetothetextina scriptpurportingtobeinspiredbyMyers,andoneofaseriesintendedtobereadbyMrs.Verrall,wassingularly apt:seeProc .XXI,234,235. OfthemanycrosscorrespondencesinwhichMrs.Hollandtookpart,Iwillfirstchooseforcommentthatknown, fromaphraseinherscript,asAveRomaImmortalis .ItwasreportedbyAliceJohnsonwithbriefcommentin Proc .XXI,297303,andmorefullyinProc .XXVII,1124.Itiscontainedwithinfourscripts,thefirstwrittenonthe 2ndandthelastonthe7thMarch1906.Inthefirstscript,of2ndMarch1906,Mrs.VerrallquotedalineofLatin versewhichsherecognisedascomingfromthe2ndbookoftheAeneidandaspartofthenarrativeofthefallof

    Troy.Therestofthescriptseemedmeaninglesstoher,butherhusbandtoldherthathesawaconnection betweenthisverseandanotherLatinpassageoccurringlaterinthescript.Exceptfortellingherthatonephrase (primusinterpares )meantthePope,hedidnotexplainwhatmeaninghefoundinthepassage.Hethought, thoughhedidnottellherso,thatitreferredtoRaphael'spictureintheVaticanofPopeLeoI,underthecelestial protectionofSt.PeterandSt.Paul,turningbackAttilafromhisintendedattackonRome. TwofurtherscriptsofMrs.Verrall'swrittenonthe4thand5thMarchconveyednomeaningtoher,apartfromthe words"theStoicpersecutor",whichshesawcouldonlymeantheemperorMarcusAurelius.Actually,asAlice Johnsoninterpretsthesethreescripts,andIhavenodoubtrightly,theypresent"athumbnailsketch"ofthe historyofRome,oratleastofimperialandChristianRome.AfterallusionstothefallofTroywhichledtothe foundationofRome,therefollowreferencestotheemperorsTrajanandMarcusAurelius,andthecolumnsset uptocommemoratetheirexploitsthepersecutionoftheChristiansPopeLeoIandtheprotectionofthecity againstAttilabySaintsPeterandPaulGregorytheGreat,whoincreasedthePapalpowertheplacingofthe statuesofSt.PeterandSt.PaulonthecolumnswherethestatuesofTrajanandMarcusAureliushadformerly stoodthetriumphoftheChurchunderPopesJuliusIIandLeoX,forwhomRaphaelworked. Thelastscript,thatofthe7thMarch,1906,waswrittenbyMrs.HollandwhohadnonormalknowledgeofMrs. Verrall'sscriptsof2nd,4thand5thMarch.Itincludedthewords"AveRomaimmortalis.HowcouldImakeit anyclearerwithoutgivinghertheclue?" InseveralofhiswritingsMyerstakesthestoryofRomeastoldintheAeneidassymbolicofthespiritual evolutionofmankind.ThelastparagraphofthelastchapterofHumanPersonalitycomparesthe"nascentrace ofRome,whichborefromtheTrojanaltarthehallowingfire"with"thewholenascentraceofman".Mrs.Verrall andMrs.HollandmustbothhavebeenfamiliarwiththissentimentofMyers.Areferencetoorelaborationofitin thescriptsofeitherorbothwouldthereforenotbesignificantbyitself,andapartfromspecialcircumstances.It istobenotedhowever(1)thatthewholeaffairwasbegunandendedinsixdays,whichwouldhavebeenmost improbableiftheonlyoperativecausehadbeenacommontrainofthought,aidedbychance:thattherearein thescriptsofeachautomatistwordssuggestingacrosscorrespondence,Mrs.Verrall'sscriptsayingthatshe wouldreceiveamessagefromanotherwomanandthat"aftersomedays"shewouldeasilyunderstandwhat shewaswriting,andMrs.Hollandwriting"HowcouldImakeitanyclearerwithoutgivinghertheclue,"which correctlyimpliesthattheotherautomatists'spartwascomplete:(3)thattheRomethatMyersusedasa symbolwasthatoftheAeneid,writtenintheearliestdaysoftheEmpire,whileMrs.Verrall'sscripts,afterthe referencetothefallofTroy,areallaboutthelaterEmpire,fromTrajanon,andthetriumphofChristianRome,to whichthewordsRomaimmortalis aremuchmoreappropriate. Onceagainwehaveapatternforwhichadesignermustbesought,andonceagainVerrall'sroleaspossible agentmustbeconsidered.Thereisnotraceofhisconsciousintention,astherewasintheOneHorseDawn experiment,butitisconceivablethat,afterhehadformedtheopinionthatthescriptof2ndMarch1906referred crypticallytoRaphael'spicture,hissubconscious,ruminatingonthetwosaintsasprotectorsofRome,might haveformedtheassociationswithTrajan,MarcusAureliusandtheircolumnsmentionedabove,and telepathicallyhaveimpressedthemonMrs.Verrall'ssubconscious,andthatatthesametimeandinlike mannerheimpressedMrs.Holland'ssubconsciouswiththegeneralideaofRomaimmortalis .Thissuggestion cannotbeeitherprovedordisproved,but,iftakentobecorrect,itoffersnoexplanationofwhyandhowthe subjecteverfounditswayintothefirstscript,thatof2ndMarch1906. Inabilityoftheautomatiststograspthemeaningofwhattheyarewritingrecurssofrequentlyinthewholebody ofscriptsasstronglytosuggestthattheircrypticlanguage,sometimestheirsuperficiallynonsensicallanguage, wasdeliberatelyusedbythescriptintelligencetofrustratetheautomatist'sunderstandinguntilthepurposeof thescriptintelligencehadbeeneffected. TheSevenscase(Proc .XXIV,222253)wasmuchmorediffuseandcomplex.Inallitsstagesitwasspreadover fourandahalfyears,fromJuly1904toJanuary1909,butwithastageofmarkedactivitybetweenthe20thApril and24thJuly1908.Sevenpersonswereinvolved,threeofthembeingtheprincipalmembersatthattimeofthe SPRgroupofautomatists(Mrs.Verrall,Mrs.Holland,andmywife,H.V.).Theotherfourwerethemedium,Mrs. Piper,twominorautomatists,Mrs.FrithandMrs.Home,andPiddington.Afullaccountoftheaffairasreported byAliceJohnsonsetsoutsomeconnectionsbetweenthescriptsofthesesevenwhichforsimplicity'ssakeI omit,confiningmyselftothreetopics,referencestothenumberSeven,toDanteandtoPiddington'spartinthe affair. Onthe13thJuly1904,atsometimeinthemiddleofthedaythatcannotbeexactlyfixed,Piddingtonwrotea

    "posthumousletter"attheSociety'sroominLondon,scaledit,andgaveittoAliceJohnsontokeep.Theletter beganasfollows: "IfeverIamaspirit,andifIcancommunicate,Ishallendeavourtoremembertotransmitinsome formorotherthenumberSEVEN. "Asitseemstomenotimprobablethatitmaybedifficulttotransmitanexactwordoridea,it maybethat,unabletotransmitthesimplewordseveninwritingorasawrittennumber,7,I shouldtrytocommunicatesuchthingsas:'Thesevenlampsofarchitecture','Thesevensleepers ofEphesus','untoseventytimesseven','Weareseven',andsoforth.ThereasonwhyIselectthe wordsevenisbecausesevenhasbeenakindofticwithmeeversincemyearlyboyhood..." Hecontinuesbyreferringtohishabitoftakingitasagoodomenforhisgolfifhesawfromthelinksarailway enginedrawingsevencarriages,andaddedthathehadpurposelycultivated"thistie',asthememoryofitmight "survivetheshockofdeath". Onthesamedayat11.15a.m.Mrs.Verrall,whowastheninSurrey,wroteascriptwhich,aftersome nonsensicalLatinandGreekwords,continued: "Butthatisnotrightitissomethingcontemporarythatyouaretorecordnotethehourin Londonhalfthemessagehascome." TherestofthescriptpurportstogivethecontentsofMyers's"posthumous"envelope(seep.168),andends "SurelyPiddingtonwillseethatthisisenoughandshouldbeactedon.F.W.H.M"Thisis,Ithink,theonly instanceofanydirectioninallMrs.Verrall'sscriptsto"notethehour"because"somethingcontemporary"was toberecorded.Theonly"contemporary"eventrelevanttocommunicationsfromMyerswasPiddington's "posthumous"letter.AlthoughthiswasprobablynotwrittentillshortlyafterMrs.Verrall'sscript,andalthough thephrase"halfthemessage"isnotaltogetherappropriatetothisopeningmoveinacrosscorrespondence involvingsixotherpersons,neverthelessthescriptmay,withouttoogreatastrain,beregardedasreferringto Piddington's"posthumous"letter,oftheexistenceofwhichMrs.Verrallhadnonormalknowledge.Thesetwo documentsof13thJuly1904completethefirststage. Nothingmorehappenedforoverthreeyears.Onthe6thAugust1907H.V.wrote: "Arainbowinthesky fitemblemofourthought Thesevenfoldradiancefromasinglelight manyinoneandoneinmany." ThescriptcontinuedwithaLatinsentence,whichmightbeconstruedasmeaningthatsomeonehadsent messagestovariouspersons,andthatthesemessagesweretobe"coordinated".ThatishowMrs.Verrall seemstohaveunderstoodthescriptwhenshereaditonthe28thAugust1907,forsheherselfwroteascript includingthesewords: "TrythisnewexperimentSaythesamesentencetoeachofthemandseewhatcompletion eachgivestoit.LetPiddingtonchooseasentencethattheydonotknowandsendparttoeach. Thenseewhethertheycancomplete." ThethirdstagewasintroducedbyPiddington'sdiscoveryonthe15thFebruary1908thatascriptwrittenbyMrs. Hollandonthe8thApril1907,whichmentionedLeahandRachel,wasareferencetotwopassagesofDante. OnepassagewasfromtheConvitoandhasnobearingonthecrosscorrespondence.Theotheristheaccount inCanto27ofthePurgatorioofthedreamwhichDantehadwhileintheSeventhCircle. TheseallusionsseemedtothrowlightonotherreferencestoDanteinthescriptsofMrs.Verrall,H.V.,andMrs. Piper,andinMarchPiddingtonshowedMrs.VerrallandH.V.thedraftofapaperinwhichheanalysedallthe referencestoDantetheywerenotatthattimenumeroustobefoundinallthescripts.ThisledMrs.Verrallto readthePurgatorio,the27thand28thCantosofwhichinparticularwerediscussedinhisdraft.H.V.didnot herselffollowuptheDantereferences,nordidsheknowthathermotherwasdoingso. AsfromthispointallusionstotheDivinaCommediaarecloselyconnectedinthescriptswithallusionsto

    seven,itmaymakethecaseeasiertofollowifabriefsummaryisheregivenofthecontentsofCantos2731of thePurgatoriotowhichmostoftheallusionsrelate.MentionhasalreadybeenmadeofDante'sdreamofRachel inCanto27.InCanto28he,VergilandStatiusreachaflowerymeadowthroughwhichrunsasmallstream. Followingthistowardsthesunrise(Canto29)theyseeapproachingsevencandlestickstheflamesofwhich leaveintheheavensatrailofthecoloursoftherainbow.ThisisthelastplaceatwhichVergilismentionedas present.AsapaganheisnotpermittedtoseethemysticvisionofChristandtheChurch,typifiedbyaGrifon drawingaCar.ItisnothoweveruntilCanto30thatDantenoticesthatheisnolongerthere.InCanto31Dante isinstructedtogazeon"theemeralds",thatisonthegleamingeyesofBeatricewhoisstandinginthecar: onlyasreflectedinthem,asaSuninamirror,canheseetheGrifoninitstwofoldnature. Thereareinthescripts,besidesseveralallusionstotheseCantoswhichseemtomecertain,severalothers which,asbeingdoubtful,Idonotmention.Mrs.VerrallfinishedherreadingoftheseCantosonthe8thMay 1908andonthesamedaywrotesixteenlinesofEnglishverseonVergil,asonewhohadledothersto ChristianitybutbyhiscontinuanceasapagancouldnotentertheEarthlyParadise:"Notforhiseyesthat Visioninitsglory"etc.OnthesamedayMrs.PiperinAmerica,duringthewakingstagethatfollowedher trance,said'YeareSeven.IsaidClock!Tick,tick,tick.""Weareseven"isoneofthephrasesPiddington mentionedinhis"posthumous"letter,and"tick,tick,tick,"thoughitappearsprimarilytorefertoHodgson,may alsoalludetothe"tic"thatPiddingtontwicespeaksof. Onthe11thMay1908H.V.wroteascriptincludingreferencesto(1)Jacob'sladder,(c)aspinningtopwith manycoloursthatblendintoone,(3)thesevenbranchedcandlestickandthesevencoloursoftherainbow,(4) "manymysticsevens...weareseven."ThescriptissignedF.W.H.Myers.Oftheitemsinthisscript(1)is mentionedinCantos21and22oftheParadisoasseenintheSeventhHeaven(2)maybethewheelofCantos 10,12and28oftheParadiso(3)alludestothesevencandlesticksofCanto29ofthePurgatorio. Onthe12thMay1908Mrs.PipergaveasittingatwhichDorr,theAmericaninvestigator,askedhertoexplain someofthewordsshehadspokenonthe8thMay,including"Weareseven".Shewrote"Wewereseveninthe distanceasamatteroffact"and,afterquestionsonothersubjects,"Sevenofus,7,seven". Onthe11thJuneMrs.Frithwroteapoemincludingthefollowinglines: "Pisgahisscaledthefairanddewylawn Invitesmyfootstepstillthemysticseven Lightsupthegoldencandlestickofdawn." TheBiblicalPisgahhasnoconnectionwithanymysticseven,orgoldencandlestickofdawn,anditseems clearthattheintentionistorefertotheEarthlyParadiseandtoCantos28and29ofthePurgatorio. Onthe23rdJuly1908Mrs.Holland,thenatsea,wrote: "Thereshouldbeatleastthreeinaccordandifpossibleseven." Sheproceedstodescribesymbolicallythesevenwhoshouldbeinaccord,specifyingsixoftheactualseven correctly,butleavingoutPiddingtonandapparentlyincludingaminorautomatist,Mrs.Forbes,whowasnotin factconcerned.Thelatterpartofthesamescripthadthesewords:"Takethisfortoken'Greenbeyondbelief'... NotonlyontheoceanmaytheGreenRayappear."AliceJohnsonunderstoodtheemphaticreferencetoGreen toalludetothe"emeralds"ofCanto31whichreflectedtheGrifonasamirrorreflectsthesun.InviewofMrs. Holland'searlierreferencestoDantethisseemstomeprobablyright. Onthe24thJuly1908aMyersControl,purportingtospeakthroughMrs.Home,said"Seventimessevenand seventysevensendtheburdenofmywordstoothers". Thatconcludesthethirdactofthedrama.Thefourthisbrief.Onthe19thNovember1908AliceJohnsontold PiddingtonofasevenscrosscorrespondencewithDanteallusionstobefoundinthescriptsofMrs.Verrall, Mrs.Holland,Mrs.Piper,H.V.,Mrs.FrithandMrs.Home.(WhilethereisnodoubtthatbothMrs.Piperand Mrs.HomereferwithemphasistotheSevenstopic,thepossibleallusionstoDante,whichAliceJohnsonnoted intheirscripts,seemtomeverydoubtful,andIhaveaccordinglynotdweltanthem.)Onthe27thNovember 1908,afterheandshehadexaminedthecasemorethoroughly,hetoldherthatthesubjectofhis "posthumous"letterwasvariationsonthethemeofSeven.Shethengotouthissealedenvelopefromthelocked drawerwhereshehadkeptit.Theyexaminedit,foundthesealsintactandopenedit.Untilthatdayshehad

    hadnoinklingwhatthecontentsmightbe. Onthe27thJanuary1909Mrs.Verrall,whodidnotevenknowthatsuchanenvelopeexisted,wroteascript endingwiththefollowingpassage: "AndaskwhathasbeenthesuccessofPiddington'slastexperiment?Hashefoundthebitsofhis famoussentencescatteredamongyouall?Anddoeshethinkthatisaccident,orstartedbyone ofyou?Butevenifthesourceishuman,whocarriesthethoughtstothereceivers?Askhimthat. F.W.H.M." Thisscriptobviouslyrefersbacktoherscriptof28thAugust1907,andimpliesthattheexperimentthen suggestedhadbeencarriedoutandsuccessfullyconcluded.An"experiment",orsomethinglookingverylikean experiment,involvingPiddingtonhadbeencarriedoutandconcluded,inmyview,withconsiderablesuccess.It wasnotquiteofthekindindicatedinthescripts.Piddingtonneversentpartsofasentencetovarious automatists.HeputonrecordvariousassociationswithSeven,butmadenoconsciousefforttotransmitthem. VariousreferencestoSevendidsometimelaterappearinthescriptsandspeechofseveralautomatistsand thatthesedidnotfindtheirwayintothescripts"byaccident"is,Ithink,clearfromtheverycondensedaccount ofthecaseIhavegiven.AliceJohnson'sfulleranalysisshouldhoweverleavenotraceofdoubt.Butwerethey "startedbyoneofyou",whetherby"you"theCommunicatorissupposedtomeanjusttheautomatists,ora groupincludingPiddingtonwiththem? TheidentityofthescriptintelligencebehindthesereferencestoSevenandtoDantemustdependinparton whetherthereferencestobothtopicsaretakenasconstitutingasinglecrosscorrespondence,orastwothat happenedtooverlapintime.Twooftheautomatists,Mrs.PiperandMrs.Home,makenoallusionstoDante thatcould,inmyopinion,beregardedasotherthanverydoubtful,andthisistosomeextentanargument againsttheunitaryview.ButinthescriptsofMrs.Verrall,Mrs.Holland,Mrs.FrithandH.V.thetwosubjects areverycloselycombined,sothatonthewholetheunitaryviewistobepreferred.Eitherviewpresupposes somesubconsciouscollaborationbetweenPiddington,aswriterofthe"posthumous"letter,andMrs.Verrall, whosereadingofthePurgatoriowasfollowedbyanewdevelopmentinthescriptsofthreeothermembersofthe groupbesidesherself.Theunitaryviewpresupposesthatthecollaborationwasveryclose. CollaborationbetweenagentandpercipientatasubconsciouslevelwassuggestedinChapterIIIaspartofthe processresultinginveridicalapparitionsofthemorecomplexkind,butinthosecasesthecollaborationis apparentlybrief.IntheSevenscumDantecaseontheotherhanditextendedoveratleastthreemonthsand, ontheunitaryview,overmorethanfouryears.Thereisnoreasontosupposethateverydetailofthecontribution tothewholemadebyeachautomatistwaspresenttothesubconsciousmindofeitherPiddingtonorMrs. Verrall.Illustrationsofthetwomainsubjectsaredrawnfromagreatvarietyofsources,eachhavingsome specialconnectionwiththeautomatistwhodrawsonit.Thus.Mrs.Holland'sreferencetotheGreenRaywhich mayappear"notonlyontheocean",whereagreenrayissometimesseenimmediatelyafterthesunsinks belowthehorizon,suggeststheindividualcontributionofanautomatistwhowasatthetimeatsea,asshewas AliceJohnson(Proc .XXIVatp.256)writes: "Whatwasitthatfromeachandallofthesemiscellaneoussourcesextractedthestrandsneeded fortheinterweavingofSevenandDante?Thetaskwouldnot,ofcourse,beverydifficultforanyone whohadsuchaplaninmind,assumingthathewasabletoinfluencetheautomatiststocarryit out.Imaintainonlythatthereisstrongevidenceoftheexistenceofsuchaplan,andIthinkit looksliketheplanofonemind,andnotoftwoormore." Sheargues(p.261)thatthecaseaffords"strong,evidenceofthedesignoragencyofsomeintelligencewhich wascognisantofthewholescheme,asfinallyrevealed",andthatthiscouldnotbeattributedtothe subconsciousofeitherPiddingtonorMrs.Verrall.Thisisineffectanargumentthatthescriptintelligencewas thediscarnatemindofF.W.H.Myerswhosenameorinitialsareappendedtosomeofthescripts.The argumentforanexternaldesignerisfranklysubjective,beingbasedonwhatthedesign"lookedlike"toAlice Johnson,butsubjectivejudgmentsarenottobedespisedwhenmadebyapersonofheracutenessofmind, scientifictrainingandimmenseknowledgeofthescriptsoftheSPRgroup. Herargument,whichappliesequallytoallthemorecomplexcrosscorrespondences,dependson"theelement ofcomplementariness"shown,assheclaimed,bythefactthatinthemeachautomatistcontributedapartof thepatternandnonethewhole.Thecriticsofthisviewarguedthatanappearanceof"complementariness" mightariseaccidentallyifsomeautomatistattemptedtoimpressanideaexpressedinherownscriptonthe

    scriptsofsomeotherautomatist.AstheeconomistPigouputitinProc .XXIII "Thetwoscriptswouldindeedbeorientatedaboutthesameideabuttheywouldbeveryfarfrom identical...mildlycomplementarycorrespondencesarelikelytoresultfromattemptsatsimple correspondences." HequotesasillustrationVerrall'sattemptintheOneHorseDawnexperimenttoinfluenceMrs.Verrall'sscript telepathically,thereproductioninherscriptbeingfragmentaryandincomplete. Thiswasnotasatisfactorybasisforhisargument,asinthatexperimentaconscioustelepathicagentcouldbe pointedto,andthelikecouldnotbedonewithanyofthecrosscorrespondences.IntheSevenscase Piddingtoncomesnearesttoitastheonlypersonconcernedwhotookconscious,deliberateaction,butsofar fromhavinganywishtotransmittelepathicallythecontentsofhis."posthumous"letter,thatwaspreciselywhat hedidnotwish,asitwouldhavefrustratedhispurposetoputonrecordwhatmightafterhisdeathproveagood testofsurvival.Asagainstsub.conscioustelepathictransmissionfromhimthereisthecombinationofSeven withDanteallusions,ofwhichheknewnothinguntilithadfiguredinthescriptsforoveramonth.Neitherthe OneHorseDawnexperimentnortheSevenscasewasassimpleasPigou'sargumentdemands. Itsoonbecameevidenttotheinvestigatorsthatthescriptsofalltheautomatiststakentogetherdidnot constituteahotchpotchofunrelatedmaterialinwhichcrosscorrespondences,selfcontainedandofshort duration,wereembeddedatrandom,butthattheyhadsuchcomplexconnectionwitheachotherastomakeit difficulttoanalysethemseparately.Asearlyas1908Piddingtondiscussing(Proc .XXII)the"concordant automatisms",ashecallsthem,thathadbythattimebeentraced,wasforcedtouseadiagramof23circles showingtheparenttopicsprintedinred,andthesubsidiaryonesinblack,withdottedlinesjoiningsevenofthe circlestoothersinordertoexplaintheirinterconnections.Thishesupplementedwiththreetabularstatements showingwhichtopicswereimplicitandwhichexplicittheirdistributionamongthevariousautomatistsandthe chronologicalorderoftheiremergence.Wheninthecourseofyearsthescripts,andhisstudyofthem,had furtherdeveloped,notwodimensionaldiagramwouldanylongerhavemethisneeds,evenhadthe supplementarytablesbeendoubledortrebled.Thewholething,ashesaidtome,wasonehugecross correspondence. Piddingtonmeant,Ithink,thatrunningthroughthewholeofthescriptsoftheSPRgroupandextendingover thirtyyearstherewasadesigncomparabletothatofparticularcrosscorrespondencesexamplesofwhichhave beengiven,inthatitcouldnotbegraspedbyanyautomatistfromknowledgeofherownscriptsbutonlyby someonewhohadthescriptsofthewholegrouptostudy.Substantially,Ithink,thisistrueandisvery remarkableinviewofthecompositionofthegroupandthechangesthatinthecourseoftimetookplaceinits membership.Butsomequalificationsmustbemade.Theautomatistswerepreventedfromunderstandingthe significanceoftheirscriptsbythecrypticlanguageofthemandbytheuseofsymbolstodenotepersonsor topics.Astheyearswentbythesymbolismbecamemoreandmorecomplexand,aswasnatural,occasional failuresoccurredintheconsistencywithwhichthesymbolswereused.Inthemainhoweverthedesignas piecedtogetherbytheinvestigatorsiscoherentanditiscertainlyfarfromcommonplace.Itincludesasortof timetablerelatedtoeventsofwhichtheautomatistsdidnotforeseetheoccurrence,particularlytheFirstWorld War. Thisinvolvedchangesfromtimetotimeinthetypeofphenomenatobefoundinthescripts.Thecross correspondences,forinstance,havingservedtheirpurposebecomefewerandlesselaborate.Thepartsplayed bytheautomatistswerenotinterchangeable,sothatoneofthemmighthefurtheringthedesignbyoccupying thecentreofthestage,whileotherswereleftwithnothingtodoexceptwaitfortheircue.Theyseemtohave adoptedthepracticeoffillingintheirsparetimewithrepeatingpointsalreadymade,explanationsastothe processofcommunication,orwhatappearstobemerepadding.Ifduringtheseperiodstheflowofscripthad beencompletelychecked,theymighthavelostinterestandnotbeenpreparedtoresumetheirpartswhen occasionrequired.Thisisofcoursespeculative.Whatiswellestablishedisthatthereisadesignrunning throughthescriptsofeverymemberofthegroup. Astofouroftheprincipalmembersofthegroup,Mrs.Verrall,Mrs.Holland,H.V.,Mrs.Piper,thereisnoneed tosaymoreherethantogivethedatesoftheiractivity.Mrs.Verrall'sautomaticwritingbeganin1901and continueduntilveryshortlybeforeherdeathin1916.Mrs.Holland'sconnectionwiththegroupbeganinthe autumnof1903andcontinueduntilabreakdowninherhealthin1910.H.V.alsobeganwritingin1903,but wrotefewscriptsuntil1907.Shewentonproducingscriptsuntil1932,butwithmuchlessfrequencyinthelatter partofthatperiod.Mrs.Piper'slongmediumshipbeganin1886andcontinueduntilafter1920:itwasonly

    howeverforapartofthattime,forafewyearsfollowingHodgson'sdeathin1905,thatherscriptshadanyclose connectionwiththoseofothermembersofthegroup. Threeotherautomatistsplayedveryimportantpartsinthegroup.Mrs."Willett"(Mrs.CoombeTennant),whose husbandwasMyers'sbrotherinlaw,developedherfacultytowritein1908andcontinueduntilafter1930with someinterruptionduringtheFirstWorldWar.DameEdithLytteltonjoinedthegroupin1913,butmuchofher automaticwritingdidnotclaimanyconnectionwiththescriptsofthegroup:Idonotknowhowlongher connectionmaybeconsideredaslasting.Mrs.StuartWilson,theAmericanwifeofanofficerintheBritish Army,respondedduringtheFirstWorldWartoanappealbytheSPRforpersonswillingtotakepartin experimentsintelepathy.Her"scripts"weretherecordsshemadeofimpressionsreceivedbyherinastateof slightdissociationshortlybeforegoingtosleep.Theywerefoundonexaminationtobeconnectedwiththe scriptsofothermembersofthegroup,andtheycontinuedtillabout1930,whenPiddington,whohadbecome theprincipalinvestigatorandwasoverwhelmedwiththemassofmaterialrequiringhisattention,invitedherand H.V.tostopwritingunlesstheyfeltastrongimpulse. Withoutsomeexplanationastothenatureofthissocalled"group"thatwordmightbemisleading,as suggestingaverymuchcloserpersonalfamiliaritybetweenitsmembersthaninfactexisted.Mrs.Verralland H.V.naturallysawagooddealofeachother,evenafterH.V.hadmovedtoLondon.Hermothersawmostofher scriptswhenorsoonaftertheywerewrittenandshowedhersomeofherown:allthiswasrecordedindetailand passedontotheinvestigators,whotookitintoaccountintheirinterpretationoftheirwritings.Thathoweverwas aspecialcase,andspeakingbroadlytheonlyconnectionbetweentheautomatistsbeganwhenconcordances betweentheirscriptswerenoticed.Thisdidnotinsomecasesresultinanypersonalcontacts.Mrs.Willett's identitywasneverknowntoMrs.HollandorMrs.Wilson.Mrs.Wilsonneverknewpersonallyanymemberofthe groupexceptH.V.,withwhomshemadecontactthroughtheexperimentsintelepathy.Thescantinessofher personalconnectionwiththegroupandthedifferenceofnationalbackgroundaddedgreatlytothevalueofher contributiontothetotaleffect,butthissortofdetachmentwasinalessdegreecharacteristicofthegroupasa whole.Ofthelessimportantmembersofthegroupafewhavebeennamed,butinashortaccountsuchasthis nofurthermentionofthemneedbemade. AnargumentthatforthirtyyearsF.W.H.Myers,HenrySidgwickandtheirfriendsspenttheirpostmortem energies,thetimeofagroupofwomenseveralofwhomhadfairlyimportantdutiesofotherkinds,andthe ingenuityofinterpreterssuchasAliceJohnson,PiddingtonandG.W.Balfour,inprovingtheirsurvivaland identitybyintricateverbalpuzzleslikethecrosscorrespondences,woulddefeatitself.Theywouldhavebeen almostasworthilyoccupiedinbangingtambourinesinthedarknessofasanceroom.Proofoftheirsurvival andidentitywasindeedoneoftheirpurposesasclaimedinthescripts,butnottheonly,norindeedthemost importantpurpose. Asdeclaredinthescripts,theultimatepurposeoftheCommunicators,orofthescriptintelligenceifthatphrase ispreferred,wasthebringingaboutofaworldorderbasedoninternationalpeaceandsocialjustice.Thatisnot atrivialproject,noroneunworthyofthepersonsrepresentedasengaginginit.Norwasitonewhicheitherthe automatistsortheinterpreterscouldfeelthattheywere,intheirrespectiveroles,wastingtimeandeffortin furthering.Itmightindeedbesuggestedthattoalltheautomatiststheidealwassoacceptableastomakeit unnecessarytolookforaparanormalexplanationoftheemphasislaidonitinthescriptsofthegroup,whether writtenbefore,duringoraftertheFirstWorldWar.Commontrainsofthoughtinagroupthemembersofwhich, notwithstandingdifferencesofnationality,andsomeacutedifferencesofpoliticalopinion,hadallbeenrearedin thesameclimateofhumanistidealism,mightaccountforthesupportwhichtheprojectreceivesintheirscripts, withoutinvokinginspirationfromanexternalsource. Butthiswouldnotsufficetoaccountforthewaythesubjectisdevelopedintheirscripts,fortheuseofa symbolicschemecommontothegroup,anditselfdependingforitsmeaningonfactsnotnormallyknownto anymemberofthegroupuntillongaftertheappropriatesymbolshadbeenestablished,andthefactshadbeen referredto,crypticallyindeed,butasregardedinretrospectwithnouncertainty.Thenextchapterwillseekto explainthis.

    Chapter14:Crosscorrespondences:NewEvidence
    W.H.Salter ITISnopartofmyargumenttosuggestthatthescriptsoftheSPRgroupmustbeparanormal becausefortyorfiftyyearsagotheyproclaimedaprojectwhichwecanallseeripeningtofulfillment.Asto whethertheprojectisnearerfulfilmentnowthanitwaswhenfirstproclaimedtherewouldbesharp differencesofopinion.Theveryexistenceoftheprojectmustbeaccepted,ifatall,onthewordofthe Communicators.AllthatIamconcernedtodoistoexplainandillustratethemannerinwhichtheprojectis announcedinthescriptsandtodrawsomeinferencesfromit. Itwillberememberedthatathersittingof12thMay1908Mrs.Piper,askedtoexplainthewords"Weare seven",spokenatanearliersitting,declared,'Yewereseveninthedistanceasamatteroffact".This statementissupportedbythescriptsofMrs.Verrall,Mrs.Holland,H.V.,Mrs.WillettandMrs.Wilsonallof whomrefertotheactivitiesofagroupofseven.Someofthesevenarementionedbyname,othersreferred tobysymbolswhich,ifnotunderstoodatthetimebytheautomatistconcerned,werefoundbylaterenquiry tohaveaspecialappropriatenesstooneofthecommunicatinggroup.Thegroupitselfissymbolised collectivelybytheseventraditionalcoloursoftherainbow,thesevennotesofthescale,thesevenpetalsof aflowerofsomevarietythatcannotbeidentified,andsoon. Thegroupconsistedoffourmenandthreewomen.Threeofthemenwerethethreeprincipalfoundersofthe SPR,HenrySidgwick,FredericMyers,andEdmundGurney.Mrs.Verrallknewthemallpersonally.Myers wasalsoknownpersonallytoMrs.Willett,whowasrelatedtohimbymarriage,toH.V.,andtoMrs.Piper. Alltheautomatistsknewsomething,andmostofthemagreatdeal,abouttheFounders'workinpsychical research.Therewouldthereforehavebeennopointinreferringtoanyofthembysymbolssuchasthose usedtodenotetheotherCommunicators,andtheyareidentifiedinthescriptsbytheirnamesorinitials. TheotherfourmembersofthecommunicatinggroupwereFrancisMaitlandBalfour,MaryCatherine Lyttelton,OctaviaLauraTennant,andAnnieElizaMarshallofHallsteads(seep.167above)whomMyers calledPhyllisinhisautobiographicalfragment. OfthesefourF.M.Balfouristheonlyonementionedbynameinanyofthescripts,hisfullnamebeing givenintwoearlyscriptsofMrs.Verrall's.SheknewhimbothasthebrotherofMrs.Sidgwickandasher husband'scontemporaryatTrinity,Cambridge.Hewasadistinguishedbiologist,whomadeaspecialstudy ofembryologyandtheevolutionoffishes.ToaidinhisstudieshekeptafishingboatatDunbar.Hewas killedinanAlpineaccidentin1882.Unlikeothermembersofhisfamily,heneverduringhislifeshowedany interestinpsychicalresearch.Besidestheovertmentionsofhisname,therearenumeroussymbolic referencestohimconnectedwithhisfirstname,Francis,hisstudiesoffishlifeandhisdeathintheAlps, anditisthroughthesesymbols,andnotthroughhisrealname(thoughthisisgiven)thatthescripts indicatehisworkasamemberofthegroup. MaryCatherineLytteltonwasprobablyknownbynametoMrs.Verrallwhowasaneighbourofherbrother ArthurLyttelton,whenhewasMasterofSelwyn.ShediedasayoungunmarriedwomanonPalmSunday, 1875.Therewereunusualcircumstancesconnectedwithherlastillness,herburialandtheactiontakento perpetuatehermemorywhichwereknowntoveryfewpersonsbutarealludedtointhescriptsofseveralof theautomatistsatfirstcryptically,butwithmoredefinitenessinMrs.Willett'sscriptsof1912.Afullaccount ofherandthescriptsrelatingtohermaybefoundinLadyBalfour'spaperon"ThePalmSundayCase"in Proc .52.Thesymbolsbywhichthescriptsindicateherincludereferencestothesecircumstances,toboth herChristiannames,tothecrestandcoatofarmsofherfamily,andtoaportraitofherholdingacandle. OctaviaLauraTennantwasthefirstwifeofAlfredLytteltonanddiedin1886soonafterthebirthofheronly child,ThefirstcrypticreferencestoheraretobefoundintheearlyscriptsofMrs.Verrallinwhich,in obscureLatin,allusionismadetothememorialtabletapeacockonalaureltreedesignedforherby BurneJones.Mrs.Verrallhadmostprobablyheardofher,andhadpossiblyheardofthismemorial,butdid notrecognisethereferencetoheroritinherautomaticwriting.Mrs.Holland,arelativeofBurneJones, certainlyknewthewholestory.

    ForAnnieElizaMarshall,whodiedin1876,Myershadformedadeepattachment,whichinfluencedhis wholeoutlookonlife.WhenMrs.VerrallbeganwritingautomaticallysheknewthatMyershadbeendeeply inlovewithawomanlongsincedead,whosefirstChristiannameshealsoknew.Shedidnotknowwhat hadbeenhersurnameeitherbeforeoraftermarriage,northecircumstancesinwhichMyersmether,nor thename"Phyllis"bywhichhecalledherinhisunpublishedwritings.ThisnameMyerstookfromVergil's SeventhEcologue,lines59and63,thelatterofwhichbeginsPhyllisamatcorylos ,Phyllislovesthehazels. Thehazelisaccordinglyanappropriatesymbolforher.AftertheopeninginDecember1904ofMyers's "posthumous"envelope,Mrs.Verralllearntherfullnameandotherfactsrelatingtoher.Shehadalready givencrypticallyinherscriptshermaidensurnameand,asmentionedonp.168,adescriptionofherhome, Hallsteads. Atthispointascepticmightreasonablysaythathewouldreservehiscriticismoftheallegedschemeand ofthesymbolisminwhichitissetoutuntilhehadbeengivenfurtherparticularsoftheschemeand examplesofthesymbolsasusedinthescripts,butthatwithregardtoanyclaimforparanormalknowledge inMrs.Verrall'sscriptseitherastocircumstancesconnectedwithMaryCatherineLytteltonorwithPhyllis hewouldliketoknowwhatreasonthereisforinvokinganythingotherthansubconsciousmemory.As regardsMaryCatherineLyttelton,whosecrypticappearanceinherscriptsMrs.Verrallneverofherself recognised,someofthecircumstancesreferredtoinherscriptswereknowntosofewastomakeitmost improbablethatshehadeverheardofthem.Itwasnotuntilfurtherreferenceofamoreexplicitkindhad beenmadetotheminMrs.Willett'sscriptswrittenbetween1912and1916thattheinvestigators,after closeenquiry,bothlearntallthefactsandcouldunderstandallusionsinMrs.Verrall'sscriptsmadeten yearsormoreearlier:seeLadyBalfour'spaper.Thefactsthemselvesweresocuriousthatifshehadever hadnormalknowledgeofthem,shewouldalmostcertainlyhaverecognisedherfairlyfrequentreferencesto them. InthecaseofPhyllis,Myers'sreticenceonthispartofhisliftmakesitunlikelythatheevergaveMrs. Verrallanyparticularsofit,closeastheirfriendshipwas,andtheargumentfromnonrecognitioniseven morecogenthere,asMrs.Verrallbeganwritingautomaticallywiththepossibilityofcommunicationsfrom himinview,andwasintenselyinterestedineverythingthatrelatedtohisinnerlife.ThePhyllisreferences begantoappearwithinafewweeksofherfirstscript.Norisitplausibleinmyviewtoattributetolatent memorytheoccurrenceinthefirstofallherscripts,thatof5thMarch1901,ofapolyglot,crypticquotation, meaninglesstoherconsciousmind,ofwordsinasonnetbyMyerswhichtothebestofherrecollectionshe hadneverseenbeforeitspublicationinOctober1904intheposthumousbookFragmentsofProseand PoetryseeProc .XXIV,162. ThegroupofsevenCommunicatorshadseveralinternallinksSidgwick,MyersandGurneyasfoundersof theSPRSidgwickF.M.Balfour,MaryCatherineLytteltonandOctaviaLauraTennant,asallbelongingby birthormarriagetotheBalfourorLytteltonfamilies,betweenwhichaclosefriendshipexistedMyersand Phyllisbytheirmutuallove.Knowledgehoweveroftheirpersonalhistorieswouldnotgiveanyrational groundsforinferringthattheywouldallbeassociatedintheplansetoutinthescripts,orindeedinany commonventure. Andinfactthescriptsexpresslydisclaimanysuggestionthatasmallgrouplikethis,drawnfromonesocial stratuminonecountry,wasundertakingaprojectofthescaleandimportanceindicated.Theplan,they say,wasmadebeforeanyoftheCommunicatorsdied,andthereweremanymoreinitthantheautomatists knew.Inadequateasthisgroupofsevenobviouslywastobearthewholeresponsibilityoftheplan,theyhad somespecialqualificationsforbeingitsprophets.Sidgwick,MyersandGurneywerewellawareofthestage theproblemofsurvivalhadreachedattheendofthenineteenthcentury,andofthepointsatwhichthe evidencefellshortofcogency.Allsevenwerebyreasonoffamilylinksandfriendshipsestablishedduring theirlives,inapositiontogetahearingthroughtwosuchothergroupsastheSPRautomatistsandtheir interpreters. FromthebeginningofherscriptsinMarch1901untiltheopeningoftheMyers"posthumous"envelopein December1904,Mrs.Verrallwasthemostimportant,andformostofthetimetheonlyautomatist.Her purposewastogiveMyersanopportunityofcommunicating,andwhetherornotthismayberegardedas accomplished,she,orthescriptintelligenceworkingthroughher,hadintheseyearsspecifieda communicatinggroupofseven,somementionedbynameandsomebysymbolicallusionsnotrecognised byheratthetimebutclearenoughinretrospectwhentheclueswereforthcoming. Mrs.HollandandH.V.beganwritingin1903,andthesecondstageofthetimetablestartsthen,lasting

    untiltheWillettscriptsof1912.Themainfeatureofthisperiodistheproductionofcrosscorrespondences inwhich,atvarioustimes,Mrs.Verrall,Mrs.Holland,H.V.,Mrs.Piper,Mrs.Willettandsomeminor automatiststookpart.These,forthereasonsgiveninChapterXIII,providedanewformofevidencefor survival,Atthesametime,andmainlythroughthem,thepurposeoftheCommunicators,onlyoutlined duringthepreviousstage,isclearlysetoutandislinkedwiththeCommunicatorsbothindividuallyandasa group. Thethirdstagemayberegardedaslastingfromthespringof1912untilthewinterof1922,whenPiddington readapaperentitled"ForecastsinScriptsconcerningtheWar",publishedthenextyearinProc .XXXIII.The mainfeaturesofthisperiodwere,(1)Mrs.Willett'sscriptsfrom1912on,whichputinthehandsofthe investigatorscluestocrypticpersonalreferencesinthescriptsoftheearlierautomatists(2)theincreasing definitenessinthescripts,particularlythoseofMrs.Lyttelton,ofpredictionsofthecomingWarof1914as oneofthesacrificesnecessarytotheachievementofabetterworldorder,(3)theentryintothegroupof automatistsofMrs.StuartWilson,whosescriptshaveaspecialinterestduetoheralmostcomplete personaldetachmentfromtheothermembersofthegroup.WiththeelucidationthroughMrs.Willettof obscureallusionsintheearlierscripts,therewaslittlepointincontinuingthecrosscorrespondences.They accordinglyfadeout,thelastoneofsignificancebeing"TheMasterBuilder",thenucleusofwhichconsists oftwoscriptsofH.V.andoneofMrs.Lyttelton'swrittenbetween5thDecember1918and2ndJanuary 1919:seeProc .XXXVI,477505.Theproblemofdesignwhichwasraisedbythecrosscorrespondences recursinMrs.Willett's"literarypuzzles",suchasthe"Statius"and"EarofDionysius"cases,butina ratherdifferentformasonlyoneautomatistwasconcerned:seeProc .XXVIIandXXIX. Duringthefinalperiod,fromtheendof1922on,theprincipalautomatistswereMrs.Willett,H.V.andMrs. Wilson.Neitherofthetwolatterhadanyknowledge,whiletheywerethemselveswritingscripts,ofthe crucialWillettscriptsof1912.H.V.wasinformedofthemin1933,whentheycausedherintensesurprise, butMrs.Wilsondied,in1956,withouteverbeingtoldofthem.Duringthisperiodnothingmuchremainedfor thescriptstodobeyondconfirmingandemphasisingpointstheyhadalreadymade. Toreturntothefirststageofscriptactivity,referencestoRome,andtothe(retrospective)propheciesofthe PaxRomanaintheAeneidaretohefoundinveryearlyVerrallscripts,wheretheycontinuedforalongtime. Mrs.VerrallknewwellboththeAeneidandMyers'senthusiasmforit,andmayverylikelyhavereadhis poem,TheImplicitPromiseofImmortality,publishedin1882.InitMyersadaptstohisownendsVergil's famousline,TantaemoliseratRomanamconderegentem(Aen.1.33),writing"Sohardamatterwasthe birthofMan".And,again,inhisPresidentialAddress(1900)hespeaksof"themightystrugglehumanam conderegentem".TheAeneidistohimanallegoryofhumanevolution,alabourcontinuingthroughallthe ages. WhenhoweverMrs.VerrallinherscriptsquotestheAeneid,assheoftendoes,itistoillustrateadifferent ideal,notaprocessofgradualevolutionoveranindefiniteperiodoftime,butapracticalpolicytobeworked forinherownage,aninternationalorderembodyingallthatwasbestinthePaxAugusta,inparticulara peacefulorder.ForthispurposeshecombinesthelineTantaemolis ,etc.withanotherlinefromthesame bookoftheAeneid:Romanos,rerumdominosgentemquetogatam(I.282),thetogabeingthedistinctive garbofpeace. Thisconjunctiondidnothoweveroccurtillearlyinthefollowingyear(1902).Inthemeantimeitistobe notedthather3rdand4thscriptsmaketwoquotationsfromthesecondbookoftheAeneidinwhichistold thefallofTroy,adisasterwithoutwhichtherewouldhavebeennoRome.Inthe4thscript,ofthe9thMarch 1901,embeddedinanapparentlymeaninglesscontext,arethewordsquantummutatusabilloappliedby Vergil(Aen.11,274)totheghostofHectorwhenhehandstoAeneasthesacredfirefromtheTrojanshrine. ThispassageinVergilisthecentralpartoftheperorationofHumanPersonality,publishednearlytwoyears later,andthelastlineofthatbookisaquotationintheoriginalLatinofanotherline(I.297)fromthesame passage.The6thand7thofherscripts(13thand14thMarch1901)refertoAeneas'svisittothefuturesite ofRomeastoldintheeighthbookoftheAeneid. Moreimportantperhapsthantheseisthephrase"Diodmagavetheclue"inherscriptof31stMay1901.As shesaysinherreportonherearlyscriptsinProc .XX,p.31: "WheninMay1901therewasanallusioninmyscripttoDiotima,Iknewthatshewasthe onewomaninthePlatonicdialogues,andthatshewasintroducedintheSymposium"(a dialogueshehadnotthenread)."Iknewthatthesubjectofthespeechesinthatdialoguewas

    Love...IlookedthepassageuptoseewhatDiotimasaid,andhowfaritcouldbedescribedas a'clue'." ShetookthepointofreferencetobeDiotima'sassertionthatLovewasneitheragodnoramanbutagreat spirit,andthatallintercoursebetweenGodandmenwasthroughspirits,oneofthesebeingLove.Therest ofDiotima'sspeechdoesnotseemtohaveimpressedheratthetime,andshedidnotstudythedialogue morecloselyuntilNovember1902. InHumanPersonality,publishedearlyin1903,muchthelongestquotationmadebyMyersfromanyauthor (reportsofcasesofcourseexcepted)ishisadaptationandabridgement(pp.113115ofVolumeI)ofpartof Jowett'stranslationoftheSymposium.ThepassagethathadimpressedMrs.Verrallisnotquotedthere thoughitisalludedtoinalaterportionofMyers'sbook.Myersdoeshoweverquotethepassageinwhich Diotimaspeaksoftheunionofthe"godlikeman"andthe"nobleandwellnurturedsoul"whomhehas sought,andoftheirbeing"boundbyafarcloserbondthanthatofearthlychildren,sincethechildrenwhich areborntothemarefairerandmoreimmortalfar":sheinstances"Homer'soffspring",and"thechildrenof Solon,whomwecallFatherofourLaws".Mrs.VerrallpresumablyreadthispartofDiotima'sdiscoursein 1901,but,itwouldseem,withouttakingparticularnoteofit,sofaratleastasconcernedherconscious mind. Butthetopicof"childrenofthespirit",asonemaycallit,wasnotlonginmakingitsappearanceinher scripts,andthatinacuriousway.Betweenthe18thSeptemberandthe20thDecember1901,shewrote twentyfourscriptsinfourteenofwhichthereiseitheremphasisonwordsformedfromtherootgen,oron referencestothefourmembersofthecommunicatinggroupotherthanthethreefoundersoftheS.P.R..F. M.Balfourismentionedbyname:OctaviaLauraTennant'smemorialisalludedto:MaryCatherineLyttelton isreferredtobythepalm,afrequentsymbolrelatingtoherdeathonPalmSunday,andbyothersymbols too:Phyllisbyfivenames(Haslemere,Hazelrigg,etc.)suggestingthehazelwhichisafrequentsymbolof her(Phyllisamatcorylos ).Fromtherootgencome,inGreek,Latinandotherlanguageswhichborrowfrom them,wordssuchasgens (raceorpeople)andalsowordsmeaning"tobeget'. InMrs.Verrall'sscriptof21stDecember1901thegengroupofwordsandsomepersonalsymbolsare combined(1). (1)WhenquotingscriptsIPutinsquarebracketstheliterarysourcesofimportantphrasesandnoteson theirsignificance,withtranslationsofsomeofthem. "Marigoldandcockleshells[thefirstnameofMaryCatherineLytteltonandthethreeshells, morestrictlyscallopshells,ofthefamilyshield].Findthekeyforthelockandkeepitclose. Spatula[palmleaf,anotherreferencetoher].Donotforgettheworditisgenstogata[Aeneid I,282]andanothershortword..." Genstogataisrepeatedlaterinthescript. Inthenextscriptbutone,thatof4thJanuary1902,occursthispassage: "HeseltineisthereferenceLookitup.FrancisHezeltine[F.M.Balfour'sfirstnamecombined withtwooftheHazelnames,whichhavenomeaningexceptascrypticallusionstoPhyllis]. Devornikwasinthelast.Devoniacisbetter[probablyanallusiontotheevolutionoffishesin theDevonianera,andsotoF.M.Balfour].[Drawingsoftwofishes,oneaflatfish]afishora counter....TellHodgsonthewordsingenthatisnearlyright***[Begetting]isimportantnot Genesis." Thephrase"afishoracounter"perhapscombinesanF.M.Balfoursymbolwithareferenceto Aristophanes'discourseintheSymposium,whichplaysanimportantpartinthescripts,butonetoo complicatedtoexplainhere. Inthreescriptswrittenbetween13thJanuaryand3rdFebruary1902thetopicofgenstogataisemphasised andelaborated,thus: 13thJanuary."ThreeLatinwordscanshenotwritethem?wouldgivetheclueQuidfremuerunt gentes?[PsalmII,I]Gentes seemsright.Genstogatarapit..."

    29thJanuary.'...gentilenogentesgenstogatavocatRomamRomanamconderegentem [CombinationofAen.1,33and272]Genstogatamanet['Thepeoplethatwearsthetoga remains'or'endures']..." 3rdFebruary."GennatanoGensnatatogae[theraceborntothetoga]thosearethethree wordsthereismoreButtheotherwordsarethetestGensnatatogae.Ininvertedcommas singlethus'Gensnatatogae'." WhilegenstogatacomesfromtheAeneid,gensnatatogaehasIthink,nowarrantinVergilbutisan inventionofthescriptintelligence.Ihavenodoubtthatthewholeseriesofscriptsfromthe18thSeptember 1901tothe3rdFebruary1902isanelaborateweavingtogetherofthelinesquotedfromtheFirstBookof theAeneidandtheclaimofDiotimaasto"childrenofthespirit"intheSymposium.Butjustasthescript intelligencebringsbacktoearththefoundationofRomefromthenebulousallegorytowhichMyershad relegatedit,sointhescripts"thechildrenofthespirit"arenotlawsorconstitutionsbutchildrenoffleshand bloodtobebornandnurturedintheidealofaworldorderofpeacewhichtheywillhelptoestablish. Theyare"childrenofthespirit"because,sothescriptsclaim,theirbirth,characteranddestinyare influencedbythoseresponsiblefortheplan,particularlybytheSevenCommunicatorsmakinguseofthe embryologicalknowledgeofF.M.BalfourandthepsychologicalstudiesofEdmundGurney,"psychological eugenics",asMrs.Willettcallsit.AttheriskoftediumIrepeatthatIamconcernedonlywiththe developmentoftheplanasthevariousautomatistssetitoutintheirscripts,andnottoclaimthattheplan actuallyexists,andcertainlynottoclaimthatitisboundtosucceed.Themerenotionof"psychological eugenics"willdoubtlessseemabsurdtomany,butasanotion,withoutregardtoanysupposedactual instance,itdoesnotseemsotome. Theplan,asalreadysaid,istoestablishaworldorderofpeace,andthoughthePaxRomanaisa convenienttype,becauseoftheabundanceofliteraryallusionstoit,asanidealitisinadequate.Itwasnot worldwide,anditrestedonarmedforce,theimpositionofthehabitofpeacebybattlingdowntheproud (seeAen.VI,853).Inascriptof29thApril1907Mrs.Verrallwrites: "VictorinpoesyVictorinRomanceandLordofHumanTears[TennysonToVictorHugo 'poesy'shouldbe'drama']...propatriaiswrittenonacirclenotIthinkaring.ButImeana widerthing,auniversalcountry,themotherofusall[GalatiansIV,26'ButJerusalemthatis aboveisfree,whichisthemotherofusall'] "Not'OfaircityofCecrops' "ButOhfaircityofGod[MarcusAureliusMeditations ,Bk.IV] "ThatgivesoneclueIhavelongwantedtosaythatItriedbeforeIspokeofAthens[=the cityofCecrops']butyoudidnotcompleteGoldenCityofGod.ThecityofCecropsisviolet andhoary[Swinburne,Erechtheus ]lookbackatthat.TheUniversalCityisallcoloursandno colourbutbestdescribedasagoldenGLEAM." TowardstheendofhisshortpoemTennysonsays "EnglandFranceallmantobe Willmakeonepeopleereman'sraceberun." ItwasMarcusAureliuswhosaid"AsIamMarcus,mycountryisRomeasIamaman,thewholeworld". "Jerusalemthatisabove"isnot,Ithink,justanequivalentfortheNewJerusalemofRevelations butan existingstateoffreedomcontrastedwiththebondageoftheLaw.ThisscriptcombinesreferencestoRome, AthensandJerusalem,thethreesourcesofourcivilisation,andtoEngland,Franceand"allmantobe"."All coloursandnocolour"isanotherwayofexpressingtheideaofthecoloursoftherainbowunitedinasingle light.Itmaybesignificantthatthecoloursherearenotlimitedtoseven,implyingthatothersbesidesthe groupofsevencommunicatorsarefurtheringtheplan. Toreturntothesubjectof"childrenofthespirit",whichisdevelopedveryfullyinthescriptsofseveralofthe automatists,paticularlyMrs.WillettandMrs.StuartWilson,Iwillmerelyquoteasillustrationsafewscripts

    oftheearlierautomatists,twobeingscriptsofMrs.Verrall,andtwoothers,writtenindependentlyandwithin threedaysofeachother,byMrs.HollandandH.V. Mrs.Verrall'sscriptof6thSeptember1902hasinanapparentlyirrelevantcontextthesingleword"Gaetan" andherscriptof26thMay1904has "TheRingandtheBook.Pompilia'sgraveisdescribedreadthatandfindthewordsthere fivewordstogether.Thechildmother." InBookVIIofBrowning'spoemPompiliasaysshegaveherchildthenameGaetano,afteranewly canonisedsaint,becausethefivesaintsafterwhomshehadbeennamedhaddonesolittleforher.The secondscriptwouldnotbyitselfhavesuggestedanyallusiontothebirthofchildren,butthetwoscripts,the onlyscriptsofMrs.VerrallreferringtoPompiliaorherchild,obviouslydo.Itischaracteristicofthescript intelligencetointroduceatopicinthisunobtrusiveway.Gaetanoreckonsasachildofthespirit,beingas hismothersays,"bornoflovenothate".Hisfather,CountGuido,whohatedPompiliaandmurderedher, had,shesays,nopartinhim.Hertruelove,inthespiritualsense,wasthepriestwhodidhisbesttorescue herfrom'CountGuido'sclutches.Itisperhapssignificantthatthescriptof26thMay1904waswrittenonan anniversaryofthebirthofMaryCatherineLyttelton,assheisinallthescriptsparticularlyassociatedwith thebirthtopic. Mrs.Holland'sscriptof3rdNovember1909hasapassagewhichprovidesaninterestingexampleofthe crypticmethodsofthescriptintelligence.Itrunsasfollows,afterreferencesto"thenuthatch",thecrestof theFeildings,andtotheirfamilymotto"EugenethePaladin.Thepeoplewhosatindarkness"[Matthew IV,6]. Onthesurfacethisscriptlooks,andwasprobablyintendedbythescriptintelligencetolook,asajocular referencetosancesheldinthedark,particularlytoEverardFeilding'sinvestigationofthefamousmedium EusapiaPalladino,inwhichhehadrecentlyreportedtotheSPR(Proc .XXIII)forinFeilding'sresearchMrs. Hollandtookakeenbutscepticalinterest.ButisEugenejustabadshotatEusapia,thesurnamePalladino suggestingPaladininthesenseofawarriorprince,suchasthefamousPrinceEugene?Theonlyother placeinHollandscriptinwhichthewordEugeneoccursisinherscriptof13thJune1906,whichshouldbe readinconjunctionwiththescriptsof6thand20thJunewhichprecedeandfollowit.Thefirstpartofthe scriptofthe6thisabout"afriendwhowaskilledonthemountain","ascholarastudent",anditendswith mentionof"athincrustofsnowontheglacier",aniceaxe,ropesandthename"Franz".Thescriptofthe 13thbegins "Iseeyouriceyrampartsdrawn Betweenthesleepersandthedawn "Thelastsunsetwasthebeautifulone. WhatofEugene?" Anditlaterreferstospikedboots.Thatofthe20thhasasinglewordthatisrelevant"Gringelwald"(sic ), probablyanallusiontoMyers'spoem"OnaGraveatGrindelwald",describingadeathinthehighAlps. AlthoughF.M.Balfour'sfatalaccidentdidnotoccurnearGrindelwaldnorneartheotherAlpinecentresMrs. Hollandmentions,thename"Franz"andsomeotherdetailsstronglysuggestthatitistothisthather scriptspoint.ShehadnoconsciousrecollectionofhavingheardofF.M.Balfour,butmayhavereada printedaccountofhisdeath.IftheAlpineallusionsinthesescriptsrelatetohim,theobviousintentionisto combinereferencestohimasmountaineerandasgeneticist.InthatcaseEugeneinthescriptof3rd November1909presumablyrelatestoEugenicsalsoandimpliesF.M.Balfour'sresearchinthatsubject.It istobenotedthat,whilethequotationfromMatthewIV,6,hasnotinitselforbyitscontextthereany referencetothebirthofchildren,theopeningversesoftheninthchapterofIsaiah,fromwhichitistakenwith aslightchange("sat"for"walked"),isverydefinitelyabirthreference:seev.6. Twodayslater,5thNovember1909,H.V.writes "Theshipandthestarstwinstarssafecomestheshiptoharbour[Macaulay,BattleofLake Regillus,slightlymisquoted]...outofthedeepmychild[Tennyson,DeProfundis ,writtenon thebirthofhissonHallam]youwroteofthatbeforethespinningtop[Dante,Paradiso, especiallyCantoXII].Theharmonyofthespheres,harmonyofcolourandsoundseven soundsandsevencolours."

    PartofthisscripthasalreadybeenquotedanddiscussedinChapterXIIinconnectionwiththeSevens crosscorrespondence.Itwillbenotedthatthepartbeginning"thespinningtop"followsimmediatelyonthe referencetoDeProfundis .TheGreatTwinBrethrenhere,asalwaysinthescripts,meansupernormal guidanceandprotection. Mrs.Verrallpublishedareportonherearlyscriptsin1906(Proc .XX)andfromthenonnumerousother reportsonthescriptsoftheSPRgroupwerepublished.Fromthequotationsofscriptsmadeinthose papersreadersofProceedings ,includingofcoursetheautomatists,gainedagrowingknowledgeofscripts, andofthetopicsdiscussed.TothebestofmyknowledgenothingwhateverwassaidintheProceedings or inanyotherpublicationabout"childrenofthespirit"before1951(1),whentheJournaloftheAmericanSPR publishedaresumeofatalkonscriptswhichH.V.hadgiventhatSociety,withspecialreferencetothe treatmentofthissubjectinthescriptsofMrs.VerrallandMrs.Wilson.
    (1)Inherreportonherautomatic writingsinProceedingsvol.XX(1906)Mrs.Verrallreferstohersc riptsof6thSeptember1902and 26thMay1904withoutanymentionofGaetano.

    "Childrenofthespirit"arefrequentlyalludedtobothinMrs.Willett'sandMrs.Wilson'sscripts.The interpretershadhowevershownMrs.Willettin1909and1910manyofMrs.Verrall's,H.V.'sandMrs. Holland'sscripts.Thiswasamarkeddeparturefromtheirusualpracticebutwasmadedeliberatelyonwhat theyconsideredimperativeinstructionsinsomeofthescripts. Mrs.Wilson'sscripts,itwillberemembered,beganin1915whensherespondedtoanappealmadebythe SPRforpersonswillingtotakepartinexperimentsintelepathy.ShethusgotintotouchwithH.V.and becameveryfriendlywithher.Whileforseveralyearsafter1915H.V.receivedherscripts,shedidnotsee thoseofH.V.oranyoftheotherautomatists,exceptasandwhentheywerepublishedinSPR. Proceedings .ApartfromH.V.sheneverknewpersonallyanyoftheotherautomatists. ShemustbecreditedwithknowledgeofallthecrosscorrespondencespreviouslydiscussedinProceedings includingtheAveRomaImmortalis andSevenscasesdescribedinChapterXIII.Thesubjectsofthesedo indeedreappearinherscripts,aswillbeseenfromthefirstonethatIshallquote,butforthemostpartthe connectionbetweenherandtheotherautomatistsismadethroughmatterswhichhadnotbeenmade public,suchasthesymbolsappropriatetovariousmembersofthecommunicatinggroup,andthetopicof "childrenofthespirit". ReferencesbyMrs.WilsontothethreeFoundersoftheSPRindividuallyarefew,andratherdoubtful:had theybeenmorefrequenttheywouldhavehadlittlepointinviewofhernormalknowledge.Shealsothought sheknewthestoryofPhyllis,thoughinfacttheaccountshehadheardwasmostinaccurate,buther supposedknowledgemayaccountfortheabsenceofreferencestoPhyllisinherscripts.Totheother Communicators,MaryCatherineLyttelton,OctaviaLauraTennantand,particularly,F.M.Balfour,symbolic allusionsinherscriptarenumerous. HereistheWilsonscriptof22ndJuly1917: "OneofthetriumphalarchesinRome.TheRomanForumSomethingburiedthere.That somethingIthinkwastheinstrumentsandutensilsusedinthesacrificialrites...Imight almostaswellsay'TheLaysofAncientRome'andleaveitatthatfortherestofthe experiment.Toparticularise...[referencestoVirginia,Curtius,ScaevolaandHoratius]The TiberwithSt.Angeloonthefarside,andanimpressionthatthesevenbranchcandlesticksa goldenlampandothertreasurelieatthebottomoftheriveratthispoint...[referencesto LucretiaandtotheNativity]Ihadadreamlateronthatthreemenwhosometimesseemtohe talkingtomeabouttheexperimentswereregrettingthatIknewnoGreek.Ican'tdescribe themexceptthattheprincipalonehasakindly,ratherwhimsicallygaymanner." Mrs.Wilson's"scripts"arecontemporaryrecordsofscenesvisualisedbyherwhilepreparingforsleep.The experienceoftenincludesthehearingofwordsandphrases,butactualquotationsareuncommon.The scenedescribedinthisscriptappearstobebasedonanovelbyHawthorneknownasTransformation(and alsoasTheMarbleFaun)butitplainlycombinesthetwotopicsoftheRomeandSevenscross correspondences.InviewofherknowledgeofProceedings thatconjunctionisnotinitselfsignificant.But thereareseveralpointswhichstrikemeasinterestingfirsttheemphasislaidonthesacrificesnecessary toachievethegreatnessofRome.Thescriptsofalltheautomatistsstressthesacrificeswithoutwhichthe

    newworldorder,ofwhichRomeisatype,cannotbewon,butnothingcouldbefoundinthereportsin Proceedings publishedbeforethedateofthisscript,orindeedbeforePiddington'spaperinProceedings XXXIII(1923),tosuggestthatthescriptswereconcernedwiththisidea. "Thesevenbranchcandlesticks"asoneofthenumerousreferencestocandiesinscriptsallrelatingto MaryCatherineLyttelton(seep.188above)hereaselsewherepointtoherasamemberofthe communicatinggroupofseven.ThethreemenwhoregrettedthatMrs.WilsonknewnoGreekareperhaps Sidgwick,MyersandGurney,whowereallclassicalscholarsifso,the"principalone"mustbemeantfor Gurney,inwhomwhimsicalitywasanotablecharacteristic.ThisisoneoftheveryfewreferencesinWilson scriptstothethreeFounders. ThefrequencyofallusionsinMrs.Wilson'sscriptsto"childrenofthespirit"maybepartlyattributedtoher regretthatshehadnochildrenofherown.Theallusionstakemanyforms.Shebeginsoneofherfirst scripts(20thMay1915)withareferencetoPompilia. "Ifoundmyselfthinkingofthepart[i.e.ofTheRingandtheBook]wherethePopesumsup thecase,andespeciallyoflinesthatrunsomethinglikethis."[ThePopeisapostrophising Pompilia] "'Giveonegoodmomenttothetiredoldman Wearywithfindingallhisworldamiss' "Iknowthatisnotacorrectquotation,butIcangetnonearer.' Gaetanoisnotmentionedhere,andtherewouldbenocasefortakingthisasabirthreference,wereitnot forthetwoscriptsofMrs.Verrall'srelatingtoPompiliaandherchild. Herscriptof19thAugust1915runs: "...Awomanholdingababyinherlapandtoherleftasemicircleofbowedfiguresingreat bluecloaks,theirfacesquitehiddenbytheirhoods.Igottheideathattheywereoldwomen andperhapsstoodfortheFatesorrathertheSibyls."[Intheoriginalthewords"theFatesor rather"arestruckthrough.] Laterpassagesinthescriptreferto"aturkshead",alludingprobablytotheMoor'sheadwhichisthe Cobham(Lyttelton)crest,andtoCatherineCornaro,oneofthesymbolsofMaryCatherineLyttelton.Itis unnecessarytoelaboratetheappropriatenessofbothFatesandSibylstochildrenofdestiny:seefor exampleCatullus LXIV,320383,andVergil'sFourthEclogue. Alongscriptof1stMarch1916beginswiththementionofadreamofwhichonwakingMrs.Wilson rememberedoneword"Sibyl".Afterreferencetoseveralothertopicsitcontinues: "St.FrancisofAssisiinhismonk'srobe.Laurelscoveredwithsnow,andthewords'Thereis alwayssnowontheirlaurels'.Thenextpicture,ofafamilygroup,grandparents,father, mother,youngauntsanduncles,standingalittlewayoff,lookingwithaweratherthan affection,atababyinacradle,struckmeasarealisationthatthelittlecreature,whowill somedayrankamongthesaints,isnotaltogethertheirown,butinsomesortachangeling. [Afterfurtherdevelopmentofthechangelingsainttheme.]Forthemthelaurels,butlaurels coveredwithsnow." St.Francis,andtheseraphfromwhomhisOrderwasstyled"TheSeraphicOrder",appearfrequentlyin Wilsonscript,especiallyinconnectionwiththebirthofchildren,whichwouldbeasurprisingconjunctionif theSaintdidnottypifyhisnamesakeF.M.Balfour.Laurelshaveadualreferenceinscriptsgenerally.Their primaryrelationistoOctaviaLauraTennant,andItakeitthatwhenthephrase"snowontheirlaurels"first occursinthisscript,theallusionistoherandherdeathsoonaftergivingbirthtoheronlychild.Butwhen thephraserecursafterthescenewithababyinacradle,Ithinkithasasecondaryreferencetothedeathof anothersmallchild,Daphne,ofwhomMrs.Wilsonhadneverheard,butconcerningwhommuchissaidin thescriptsofotherautomatists. Anotherlongscript,of25thNovember1918,beginswiththeword"Eleusis",passesontotheShunammite's son,andalittlelaterrunsasfollows:

    "Mermaidsandtritonsinaseacave[twotritonsarethesupportersoftheCobham(Lyttelton) shield].ApoemofLowell's,ofwhichIamveryfond,calledAnEmberPictureIfoundmyself quotingfromit "'Aswedroveawayinthedarkness Thecandlesheheldatthedoor...etc. [LaterthescriptrevertstoEleusisand]"attemptsatthemythofDemeter.Shelaystheinfant Triptolemusinthefire..." ThementionofmermaidsandtritonswouldbeappropriatebothtoMaryCatherineLytteltonandtoOctavia LauraTennant,whobecameaLytteltonbymarriage.ThequotationfromLowellbringsinthecandle,oneof themostfrequentsymbolsofMaryCatherineLyttelton.BoththesonandTriptolemusmayberegardedas childrenofthespirit.Thebirthoftheformerwaspredictedtohisincredulousmother,whosehusbandwas old,byElisha,whoyearslaterrestoredhimtolife(IIKings,iv,1437).ThestoryofDemeterandthebabe sheplacedinthefireistoldintheHomericHymninherhonour.Thegoddesssuckledhimandplacedhim bynightinthefire,thathemightbedeathlessandageless.Buthismotherwatchedherandinterfered,so hemissedimmortalitybutwonlastinggloryasDemeter'snursling.Triptolemusisthenameofthechildin someversionsofthestory,thoughnotintheHomericHymn. ToreturntotheFranciscanallusions,herearetwoscripts: 19thMarch1916 "Allsortsofglassretorts,tubes,wheels(Iespeciallynoticedasortofdoublewheellikethis) [drawing].Infactthebelongingsofalaboratory...Someofthereceptacleswerefullofaclear liquidfullofshiningbubbles...Itended,asfarasIamconcerned,inamostbeautifulradiant seraph'sheadinalargetesttube." 3rdJune1917 "...Abrightiridescentobject,likeasoapbubble,oracrystal,andforminginitsomethinglike thefaceofagoldenhairedchild,withwings. "St.Francis'sSeraphwiththewingscrossedoveritsface." Theideacommontoboththesescriptsistheproductionofinfantseraphsinalaboratory,andafterwhat hasbeensaidofFrancisBalfour'sworkasgeneticist,andthebirthof"childrenofthespirit",shouldneedno furtherexplanation. Aleadingideaofthescriptsisthesupersessionofaworldrestingonforceandcrueltybyahumanerorder ofthings.Twoexampleshavealreadybeengiven,intheWilsonscriptsof19thAugust1915and1stMarch 1916,ofababegazedonbyacircleofelders.Yetathirdexampleofsuchasceneistobefoundinalong scriptof24thMarch1916,ofwhichthisisanextract: "TheAuroraBorealis.Thelighttooktheformofgiganticwarriorsleaningontheirgreattwo handedswordsandwatchingsomethingintently.Theexpression,aweinspiring,describesthe feelingtheygaveme.IthinktheyweretheoldNorseGods.InfrontofthemtheChristChild lyinginalittlemangerandradiatingamoregoldenlight." Thesymbolicmeaningofthisisobvious.Therestofthescript,continuingthegeneralidea,introduces,with someitemsnoteasytointerpret,referencestoVikings,andtwoprocessions,oneofthegreatconquerors, Alexander,Napoleon,etc.,passingthroughswathesofdeadmen,andthenoneofchildren. ThatthescriptsoftheSPRgroupofautomatistsarethelargestandmostcomplexofallconnectedpieces ofmaterialthathavebeenstudiedbypsychicalresearchersisplainfromthespacetheyoccupyinmany volumesofProceedings from1906to1938,nearly3,000pages.Evenso,manyofthescriptsproducedby thisgrouphaveneverbeenprintedbytheSPR,andmanyimportantaspectsofthemneverdiscussedinthe Society'spublications.Thisandtheforegoingchapteraremeanttobeabriefabstractofthescripts, publishedandunpublished,andtodrawattentiontovariouspointswhichseemtobeofimportancebutto havebeeneitherdeliberatelyomittedfrompreviousdiscussions,forreasonsthatseemedimperativeatthe time,ornotsoemphasisedastoputthewholesituationclearlybeforethereader.Thisattempttoput

    shortlytheessentialpointsofthescriptsmaystrikesomereadersastooinvolvedforeasyunderstanding, butinfacttheyhavebeentreatedwithgreatleniency.Alittlehasbeensaidaboutfishes,andcandles,and hazels,butnothingaboutbridges,orlighthouses,orExcalibur,orMulciber,ortheMayflowerorHairina Templeorascoreofotherheterogeneoussymbols.Theyhavenotbeenaskedtopursuetheramificationsof referencestotheSymposium,onwhichoneoftheinterpretinggroupwroteacommentaryrunningto270 pagesoftypescript. Thesetwochapters,inwhichIhavemadeextensiveuseoftheimmenseindustryandacumenofAlice Johnson,G.W.BalfourandPiddington,shouldmakeitclearthatthecrosscorrespondencesareneither selfcontainedliterarypuzzles,noryetatangleofliterarypuzzlesconnectedwitheachother,but unconnectedwiththeaffairsoflifethatonthecontrarytheyareanintegralpartofamostelaboratedesign, thehighlights,sotospeak,ofapicture,helpingtoemphasisetheunityofit,andtoshowthatthedesign couldnotbeattributedtoanysingleautomatist.Thedesignsetsoutaschemeforthecreationofapeaceful worldorder,ofwhichthePaxRomanaisanimperfectarchetype,tobepromotedbyagreatbodyof discarnateintelligences,ofwhichsevenspecifiedCommunicatorsaremembersandprophets,andtobe achievedbythecreationofaraceof"childrenofthespirit",andthroughgreatdisasterslikeWorldWars, whicharetoberegardedassacrificestothatend.(Thescriptsspeakofwarsintheplural,andofpersonal sacrificesaswell.) ThecrosscorrespondencesdescribedinChapterXIIIallfitintothisscheme.Thisisobviousasregardsthe AveRomaImmortalis andSevenscases.ItistruealsooftheEarthlyParadiseallusions,socuriously graftedontotheSevenscase.ThepageantwhichDantethereseesisasymbolicrepresentationofthelong historyofRomeinitsdualaspectofEmpireandChurch.Butitisahabitofthescriptintelligence,tomake oneliteraryallusionserveasalinkbetweenseveraltopics,andherethemeetingofDanteandBeatrice bringsin,togetherwiththetopicofRome,thetopicsofthereunionoflovers,andofdiscarnateguidance,all threebeingimportantintheschemeofthescripts.Itwouldbepossible,atthecostofalongdigression,to showhowothernotablecasesalreadymentioned,suchastheOneHorseDawnandtheMasterBuilder, havetheirplacesinthescheme. Theargumentputforwardrestsontheinterpretationofamassofsymbols,givingthatwordawidemeaning. Thisisnotoriouslyahazardousbusiness.Thereare,itmustbefranklyadmitted,considerableportionsof thescriptsforwhichnointerpretationhasbeenfound,oronlyonesofarfetchedastolackplausibility. Someofthesemayeventuallyprovesusceptibleofareasonableinterpretation.Othersprobablyconsistof associationsintheautomatist'ssubconscious,irrelevantinthemselvesbutleadingontoasignificantpoint tobereachedlater.Somemaybemerepadding.Theirpresencedoesnotinvalidatetheinterpretationofthe partsforwhichmeaningshavebeenfound,providedthereisnoinconsistencyinthemeaningsplacedon them. Thesymbolismofthescriptscoversbothpersonsandtopics.Thepersonalsymbolsarenotdifficultto interpretwhenoncethename,eventorwhateveritisthatgivestheclue,hasbeengrasped.Tillthen,they mayeludetheunderstandingbothoftheautomatistinwhosescripttheyappearandofanywouldbe interpreter,aswasshownbytheallusionstoMaryCatherineLytteltoninMrs.Verrall'sscriptsasfarback as1901,andinMrs.Holland'sandH.V.'sscripts,allofwhichseemedmeaninglessuntilMrs.Willett's Scriptsof1912.Thatthiscourseofconcealmentandsubsequentrevelationwasdeliberatelypursuedbythe scriptintelligenceIhavenodoubt. Thesymbolismrelatingtotopicsissometimesveryobscure.Butitisoftenplainenough.Nobodywhotook thetroubletolookupthesourcesofthequotationsinMrs.Verrall'sscriptof29thApril1907,asshedidat thetime,couldfailtograspitsintention.Noristhereanyambiguityintheideaunderlyingthethreescenes inMrs.Wilson'sscriptsofSibyls,awestruckrelatives,andNorsegods,allgazingonachild.Takenasa whole,thescriptsusethesamesymbolstorefertothesamepersonsandthesametopics,andinthe maindrawthesameconnectionsbetweenpersonsandtopics.Buteachautomatistpaintsthepictureinher ownway,andsomeofthegroupdrawamuchcloserconnectionbetweensomeofthepersonsandsomeof thetopicsthantheothersdo.ThisdifferencedoesnothoweveraffectthescriptsIhavequotedorthe interpretationputuponthem.Anyoneinterestedinthetechniqueofinterpretingamassofsymbolicand allusivewritingsproducedbyseveralautomatistsshouldreadPiddington'sintroductiontohispaperin Proceedings XXXIII. Themerementionofsymbolsnowadaysrousesmutteringsof"Oh,yes,Freudofcourse".Thatthegeneral schemeofthescripts,aworldorderbasedonpeace,respondedtotheconsciousandsubconscious

    wishesofagroupofwomenallbroughtupintheidealistclimateofthelastcentury,cannotbedoubted,nor thatsubsidiarybutimportantpartsoftheschememadeaspecialappealtoparticularmembersofthe group,astheideaof"childrenofthespirit"seemstohaveappealedtoMrs.Wilson.Butasaverypersistent dreamer,alwaysonthelookoutfor,andoftendetecting,Freudiansymbolisminmyowndreams,Iseeno reasontosupposethatsymbolsofthatsortarespeciallyfrequentorimportantinthescripts. Alltheautomatists,apartfromMrs.Piperwhoseeducationalstandardwasmodest,wereabovetheaverage inknowledgeofEnglishliteratureandinterestinit.ThiswouldincludeknowledgeofEnglishversionsof Classicalliteratureandlegend,andthereferencestoGreeceandRometobefoundinMrs.Holland'sand Mrs.Wilson'sscriptsimplynogreaterknowledgethancouldhavebeenobtainedinthisway.Mrs.Verrall's andH.V.'sscriptsshowagreatfamiliaritywiththeClassics,asmighthavebeenexpected:moresurprising perhapsarethegrammaticallapsesofwhichtheirsubconsciousmindswereoftenguilty.Mrs.Piper's referencestotheClassicssometimesseemtoimplymorelearningthancaneasilybeattributedtoher normalpowers.ThewealthofclassicalallusionsmadebyMrs.Willettinthe"EarofDionysius"(Proc .XXIX) ishardtoexplainonanynormalhypothesis,butthatmostinterestingcasestandsoutsidethegeneral schemeofthescripts. Paranormalknowledgeofdefinite,verifiablefactsmay,Ithink,befoundinthescriptsofMrs.Verrall,Mrs. Holland,H.V.,andMrs.Willett.Sofarasconcernstheschemeofthescriptsasithasbeendiscussed,the moststrikinginstancesofallusionsinthescriptstofactsofwhichnormallyacquiredknowledgecannotbe attributedtotheautomatistsarethoserelatingcrypticallytoPhyllisandMaryCatherineLytteltonbyMrs. Verrall,whileshewasthesoleautomatist,andthemoreexplicitreferencestoMaryCatherineLytteltonin Mrs.Willett'sscriptsfrom1912to1916.FactsnotnormallyknowntoMrs.HollandorH.V.arereferredtoin theirscriptsintheusualcrypticway,buttheyconcernmatterswhich,thoughrelatedtothegeneralscheme ofthescripts,havebeenleftundiscussedinthischapterforfearofoverburdeningit. IthasbeenarguedthatthereisaconsistentschemesetoutinthescriptsoftheSPRgroupofautomatists overaboutthirtyyearsfrom1901to1930,comprisingbothaStoryofpasteventsandaPlanforthefuture. Theschemeisreallythere,andnotaninventionoftheperfervidingenuityoftheinterpreters,foritrestson carefuldocumentation,painstakingresearchintofacts,andcommonsensehandlingofsymbolsand allusions.Theintricacycombinedwiththeconsistencyoftheschemeshowsthatitwasnotfortuitous. Commonassociationofideasamongtheautomatists,andthespreadofknowledgeofeachothersscripts throughpublicationintheProceedings oftheSociety,andthroughcorrespondenceandconversation betweenthem,aredoubtlesscontributingfactors,butinadequateasanexplanationofthewholeaffair.They donotaccountforparanormalreferencesappearingindependentlyinthescriptsofseveralmembers. Incidentallythespreadofinformationbynormalmeanswasneveruncontrollednorunrecorded,and allowanceforitwasmadewhenthescriptscametobeinterpreted.Indefaultofanysufficientlynormal explanation,aparanormalonemusthesought,andifonecanbefoundharmoniouswiththeprobable explanationsofotherparanormaloccurrences,somuchthebetter.

    Chapter15:ToWhatdoestheEvidencePoint?
    W.H.Salter INPSYCHICALresearchtherearenoshortcuts.Ithasbeennecessaryintheforegoingchaptersto exploreafewbypathsjustfarenoughtoshowthat,howeverwelltrodden,theyleadnowhere.Ithasalso beennecessarytotakearoundaboutcoursewhich,inChaptersVIIandVIIIinparticular,mayseemtohave strayedalongwayfromthegoal.Astagehasnowbeenreachedwherethenegativepartsoftheenquiry maybeleftbehindwithoutregret,andattentionfixedonitspositiveaspects. Basicallythesearethefunctionsofthesubconsciousasacreativeagentandasanorganwherebythe individualisintouchinaspecialwaywithexternalintelligences.Itscreativepowersindreamsandinpoetic inspirationwereillustratedinChapterVIIbyseveralexamples,insomeofwhichthesubconscious collaboratedwiththeconsciousfacultiesmoreorlessanequalterms,whileinothersitwassodefinitely thedominantpartnerastoseemalmosttosupersedethem.Insomeinstances,again,subconscious activitywasshownasoccurringinacontexthavingnorelationtocommunicationwithdiscarnatemindsin othersthepoetfeltthattheinspirationreachinghimfromsomesuperhumansourcewasboundupwith,or wasevokedby,adeadman'ssurvivingpersonality.Thislattersensationisdescribedinthepassages quotedfromAdonais andInMemoriamandinBlake'sletterofthe6thMay1800. Factualevidenceisofnohelpinjudgingwhetherornottheinspiredpoetisjustifiedinhisclaimtohave derivedhisinspirationfromthesurvivingintelligenceofadeadman,orfromsomesuperhumanreality,like Milton'sUrania,orfromsomemysteriousunionofthetwo.Butwhateverthepoet'sconvictionmaybeasto thesourcefromwhichhisbestworkisinspired,itcannotjustbedisregarded.Difficultiestheremaybein thewayofitsliteralacceptance,butinanyattemptatacompletemapofthesubconscioussomeplace mustbefoundforit. Fullverification,ontheotherhand,ispossibleastothefunctionsofthesubconsciousasanorganof contactwiththeintelligencesofotherlivingpersons.Observationofspontaneousparanormaloccurrences andexperimentsintelepathywith"free"material,ifinadequateasexactproofofthatfaculty,havebroughtit withintheboundsofreasonableconviction,andhaveveryusefullysupplementedthequantitative experiments,whichhavedemonstratedtherealityofitasafacultyoflivingpersons,bythrowinglightonits natureandonthewayitworks.AsthebasisforthesummingupIamnowabouttoattemptIregard telepathyasoccurringnotonlybyaonewaytransmissionfromasingleagenttoasinglepercipient,but transfusivelyinsuchawaythatboththepersonsconcerned,orallifmorethantwo,areagentsand percipientsatthesametime:seep.33. Theexamplesoftelepathicactiongivenabove,omittingforthepresentthosethecontextofwhichraisesthe questionwhethersomediscarnateintelligencemaynotbeparticipating,areeitherunusual,perhapsunique, experiencesofordinarypeople,ase.g.crisisapparitionsmostlyare,orrepeatedbutdiscontinuousactions ofpersonshavingexceptionalpowers,suchaspercipientsinexperiments.Ifthoseweretheonlywaysin whichthefacultyoperateditwouldbenaturaltowonderwhatpurposeitservedintheschemeofthings,and tosuspect,assomestudentshavedone,thatitsurvivesasacuriousrelicofadistantagebeforesight, hearingandtheothersensesweresufficientlydeveloped,ordifferentiated,toserveasmeansof communicationbetweenmanandman.Forthousandsofyearsmenhavecommunicatedwitheachotherby speechandwritingwithacertainty,precisionandfullnessfarinexcessofanythingthatcouldbeclaimed forexperimentaltelepathyorforthatfacultyasitmanifestsitselfincrisisapparitions.Telepathywasindeed atonetimeaspeediermeansofconveyingnewsovergreatdistancesthananyofitsnormalcompetitors, butscientificinventionhasforalongtimerobbeditofeventhisadvantage. Therearehowevergroundsforbelievingthattelepathyhasinthepastfulfilledandstillfulfilsausefulpurpose notincompetitionwithbutassupplementarytomorenormalmeansofcommunication.Whenthe resourcesofspeechareunderdiscussionitiswelltohearwhattheexpertshavetosay,thescholarsand thepoets.Iwillquoteonefromeachgroup,bothmenofdistinctionrecentlydead.GilbertMurray,whose scholarshipwascombinedwithexperienceasasuccessfulpercipient,declaredthatwithouttelepathy languagecouldnothavedeveloped.WalterdelaMaresaidthatwithouttelepathytherecouldbenointimate conversation.

    Thislatterpronouncementissupportedbywhatmyfriendstellmeandmyownexperienceconfirmstobea notuncommonoccurrence.Itiswhatispopularlycalled"takingthewordsoutofone'smouth".Agroupof friendswithasimilarmentalbackgroundaretalkingtogether,eachcontributingsomething.Then,outofthe blue,twoofthemwillatthesamemomentsaythesamething.Whattheysaymayarisenaturallyoutof theprecedingtalk,inwhichcasethereisnothingremarkable.Buteverynowandthen,asmanypeople wouldassert,whatissaidbythetwo,whilenot,itmaybe,entirelyunconnectedwithwhathasgonebefore, strikesboththespeakersandtheirfriendsasgivingtheconversationanewandsurprisingturn.Itisasport, somethinglikethesprayofpinkflowersInoticedtodayonascarletrosebush.Thesubjectoftheverbal sportisoftentrivialenough,andthedeviationfromthegeneralrunofthetalknotasdistinctasthe differenceincolouroftheroses.Itisnotthereforeathingthatwouldcarryanyweightinanargumentto provetherealityoftelepathy.Ifhoweverthatisproved,asItakeittobe,thisodd,intangiblephenomenon does,Ithink,reinforcetheviewimplicitindelaMare'spronouncement,thatasbetweenfriendstelepathyis continuous. Anothertypeofoccurrence,wheretheevidenceforitsbeingparanormalisequallyintangible,isthe exchangeoflettersbetweenfriendswhohavenotcorrespondedwitheachotherforalongtime.Hereagain, ifsomeeventofinteresttobothhasbecomeknowntothem,ofakindtoprompttheexchange,thereisno needtoinvoketelepathy.Butisthatalwaysthewholestory?Thecaseforcontinuityreceivesmuch strongersupportfromcrosscorrespondences,buttheselieoutsidetheimmediatediscussionwhichis confinedtothenormalandparanormalfacultiesofthelivingincircumstancesinwhichthereisnoquestion ofdiscarnateactivity. Theutilityoftelepathy,ifcontinuous,isnotfartoseek.Intercoursebetweenfriendsbyconversationand lettersisintermittent.Moreover,language,spokenorwritten,justbecauseitissopreciseinitsconveyance ofinformationastofacts,isdefectiveinthetransmissionofmoresubtlethoughtsandfeelings.Thedictum that"Languagewasgivenustoconcealourthoughts"wasnodoubtcynicalinintention,butitisamatterof commonobservationthatevenwherethereisnodesireforconcealmentordeceptionofanysort,the spokenorwrittenwordoftengivesrisetodistressingmisunderstanding.Telepathy,asacontinuousstream ofcommonsubconsciousthoughtandfeelingwouldhelpnotonlytocheckthesemisunderstandings,butto fillinthegapsincidentaltonormalintercoursebyspeechorletter. IntwopassagesinHumanPersonalityMyersputstheclaimfortelepathyevenhigher.Hewrites(Vol.I,p. 111): "Beyondandaboveman'sinnatepowerofworldwideperception,thereexistsalsothat universallinkofspiritwithspiritwhichinitsminorearthlymanifestationswecalltelepathy." Andlater(Vol.II,p.282): "Loveisakindofexaltedbutunspecialisedtelepathy:thesimplestandmostuniversal expressionofthatmutualgravitationorkinshipofspiritswhichisthefoundationoftelepathic law." Theemphasisonuniversalityinthesetwopassagesandelsewhereinthebookimpliesabeliefinsome formof"commonsubconscious"sharedbyallsentientcreatures.Thisisaconceptiondifficulttoimagine andimpossibletoprove.ItisthepsychologicalcounterpartofthemysticideaoftheGreatSoul.Whenthis ideatakestheformofabeliefthatthereisnolinkbetweencreatureandcreatureexceptthroughtheGreat Soul,itisrejectedevenbythosewho,likeTennyson,claimtohavehadmysticexperienceoftheGreat Soul:seeInMemoriam,XLVII. Toillustratethefirstofthetwopassagesquoted,MyersprintsalongsummaryofpartofPlato's Symposium.HelaysmoststressonthediscourseofDiotimawhomaintainsthatearthlyloveleadsontoan impersonalfulfilmentinknowledgeofVeryBeauty,buttohissummaryofherdiscourseheprefixesamuch shortersummaryofthediscourseofAristophaneswhoregardsasthegoaloflovethecompleteandeternal fusionofpairsoflovers.Myersarrangeshissummaryofthetwodiscoursesinsuchawayastoindicate thatthereisnothingcontradictorybetweenafullypersonalunionbetweentwoloversinlifeanddeath,and communionwiththeGreatSoulinitsaspectofBeauty,butratherthattheoneconceptionis complementarytotheother.WhetherPlatosharedthatviewisanothermatter.Allthatisrelevanthereisto notethatacceptanceofasubconsciouslinkagebetweenindividualshasnotcommittedallthosewhohave

    proclaimeditto"thefaithasvagueasallunsweet"thatleavesnoplaceforhumanloveorfriendshipafterthe deathofthebody. Thenatureoftheevidenceforprecognitionandclairvoyanceasfacultiesoftheliving,sometimes distinguishablefromeachotherandfromtelepathy,hasbeenbrieflytreatedinChapterXI.Sometimes howevertheevidenceissufficienttoshowthattherehasbeenparanormalactivity,butnotenoughtoshow whethertheactivitywastelepathic,clairvoyantorprecognitive,orperhapsofanaturenotconformingtoany ofthosethreetermsintheirusualmeaning.InsuchcasesitisconvenienttospeakofGeneral ExtrasensoryPerception(GESP),ormorebrieflyPsi.Anyphrasehoweverofwhichtheword"Perception" formspartisunsatisfactoryasalabelforfacultiesofthekindthatareoperativeinthemorecomplexforms ofmediumisticcommunicationsand,moreparticularly,inthecrosscorrespondences.Atermisneeded thatdoesmorejusticetotheintensenessandthedurationoftheactivitythereshown,thatimpliesthe progressiveelementofthinkingratherthanthemorestaticnotionofperceiving. Itishoweverlessimportanttoinventnewtechnicaltermsthantoemphasisethatwherediscarnate intelligencesare,ostensiblyatleast,actingthroughlivingpersons,thedifficultyofassigningtheparanormal activityshowntooneorotherofthesethreefacultiesisgreatlyincreased.TheinvestigatorsofMrs.Piper, whethertheytookthesurvivalistviewofhermediumshipornot,wereagreedthattheveridicalelementinthe communicationscouldbeattributedtotelepathybetweenthelivingonlybycreditingthatfacultywithpowers unparalleledbytheresultsofexperiment.The"OneHorseDawn"casecertainlywasnotplainordinary telepathy,andinadditionitraisedinacuriouswaytheproblemoftime.WhateverthecauseofMrs. Leonard'ssuccessfulbooktestsmayhavebeen,itwascertainlynotplain,ordinaryclairvoyance,ifthose epithetsareapplicabletosoobscureanddubiousafaculty.Whatisthereinthecontextofostensible discarnateactivitythatmakesthesefaculties,orGESP,orPsi,ifthosetermsarepreferred,undergoso curiousatransformation? Argumentsastosurvivalseemoftentostartwithapreconceivedideaastowhatconstitutessurvival,and thentodebatewhethertheevidenceisofakindtoestablishthatidea.Itisamoresensibleprocedureto taketheevidencestepbystepandnotewhatsortofsurvival,ifany,itpointsto.ThisisthecourseIpropose tofollow,beginningwithevidencethatiscompletelynormal,andgenerallyaccepted,nottosay commonplace. Ononepointeveryoneisagreed,believersinthetraditionalfaiths,spiritualists,meninclinedto"honest doubt",andconvincedmaterialists,thatpartofwhatwearedisposedtoregardasaman'spersonality,the partwhichcomestoourmindmostimmediatelyandinsistentlywhenwethinkofalivingfriend,hisbodily presencewiththewellknownfeatures,gestures,toneofvoice,suffersdissolutionondeath.Inconsidering thesurvivalofpersonalityweareconsideringapersonalitythatbycommonconsenthassufferedsome loss.Itisatthispointthatdisagreementbegins.Isthe"naturalbody"toberegardedas"thismuddyvesture ofdecay"freedomfromwhichisallgain,orastheessentialpersonconditioningallthoughtsandfeelings,or assomethingintermediatebetweentheextremesoftheseidealisticandmaterialisticviews,towhich Horace'swordsmaybeapplied:Nonomnismoriarmultaqueparsmei/vitabitLibitinam? Butwhatofthedistinctionbetweenconsciousandsubconscious?Dobothsurvivethedeathofthebody, andifsoaretheydividedinthesamewayandtothesameextentasinlife?Thatduringlifethedivisionwas notatanytimecomplete,andwasinsomecircumstancesobliterated,hasalreadybeenshown.Iftheview iscorrectthatthefunctionoftheconsciousistocopewiththeimmediate,daytodayproblemsofbodily existence,therewouldseemtohenopointinitscontinuanceasanevenpartiallydistinctpartofa discarnateintelligence,supposingsuchathingtoexist.Communicationsthroughmediumsand automatistsoftencontainbothelements,materialwhich,ifitsoriginwerealivingperson,onewould unhesitatinglyassigntohisconsciousmind,andothermaterialsuggestiveofsubconsciousactivity.ifa durablefusionofconsciousandsubconsciousisafeatureofdiscarnateexistence,theresultmightbe assumedtobeanintenseintellectualactivity,aforetasteofwhichisduringlifeinthebodyofferedin momentsofinspirationbythetemporaryfusionofthoseelements.Butthedifficultyofcommunicatingwith friendsstillinthebodywouldbeincreasedbysuchfusion,asinthisliferecognitionoffriendbyfriend occursontheconsciouslevelonbothsides.Communicatorsoftenmentionthedifficultiestheypurportto experienceinsendingmessagesintelligibletothoseintendedtoreceivethem.Thetroublemaybedueto theirinabilitytorecapturethefeelingsappropriatetotheirownpreviousunintegratedcondition. ToreturntoHoraceandhisclaimthatapart,alargepart,ofhimwouldescapetheGoddessofFunerals,it wasthroughhispoetrythatheclaimedalonglifeforhimself,andthat"life"infacthasalreadylastedfiveor

    sixtimesaslongashepredicted.Asimilarthoughthasinspiredmenandwomeninmanyagesand countriestoperpetuatesucha"vicariousexistence",toadoptSamuelButler'sphrase,bytheir achievementsinpeaceandwar.Itisnotanignobleconcept,anditrepresentsallthatmanythinkingpeople ofourtime,especiallywhennotunderthestressofrecentbereavement,eitherexpectordesire.Norissuch posthumousexistenceconfinedtoachosenfew.ThevillageHampdensandthemute,ingloriousMiltons haveitascertainly,ifnotforsolong,asthemoreillustriousmenwhoborethosenames. AmongdistinguishedmenHoracehasbeenoneoftheluckyones.Allhiswritingshavecomedowntous, andthereis,Ithink,noseriousdisputeastotheirgeneralmeaningandintention.Butofotherancient authorsofequalfameonlyasmallpartoftheirwork,andofsomepracticallynothing,hasreachedus,or whathasreachedusisofdebatablemeaning.Horace'sfameandinfluencehavegrown,asheforesaw,but throughwhathewrotebeforeLibitinaclaimedhershare,andnotthroughanysubsequentwritings. Thefoundersofgreatmovementsinreligionandpoliticshavebeenonthewholelessfortunate.Withinafew generations,possiblywithinaperiodshorterthantheirlifeonearth,theirfollowerswillhaveexplained, expanded,subtractedfromtheirteachingssoastomakethemunrecognisabletotheirauthors,hadthese thepowertofollowthecourseofeventssincetheirdeath. Buttomostofmankindthecaseof"therudeforefathersofthehamlet"isofmoreconcernthanthatofthe leadersoftherace.Everyonecan,ifhesochooses,leavebehindhimpleasantmemoriesofloveand friendship,andataleofusefulifinconspicuouswork.Butwithinahundredyearsthepersonalmemorieswill havefaded,andtheworkbeenoverlaidbythatofhissuccessors.Thatforhimistheendofvicarious existence,solongasitdependsontheoperationofnormalcauses. Telepathyhoweverchangesthepictureagooddeal.Thenaturaleffectofitwillbetointensifyandprolong vicariousexistencebykeepingfreshhisfriends'memoriesofthedyingman.Ifhewasdevotedtoanycause duringhislife,hisdevotionwillhavebeenmorefullyunderstoodbythem,andanylegacyofideashemay leavebehindhimwillsufferasmallerriskofperversion. Amuchmoreimportantconsequenceoftelepathyhashowevertobeconsideredifitberegardedas continuousandtransfusiveinthewayalreadydescribed.Thisbringsintheproblemofthegroupmind. Imagineacloselyknitgroupoffriendssharingacommon,absorbinginterest,religiousperhaps,orpolitical, orprofessional.Inadditiontotheconsciouslinkagebetweenthemduetotheirmeetingeachotherand exchangingletters,therewillalsobeasubconsciousbondimpellingthembytheirgrouprelationtoactina special,distinctiveway.Suchisthebasisofmilitarydiscipline.Butthemindsofthemembersofthegroup wouldstillbetheirseparateminds,andtherewouldbenogroupmindaswell.Except,perhaps,wherethe consciousandsubconsciousbondswerereinforcedbyparticularlyintenseemotion,asinsomereligious communities,bothprimitiveandmorehighlydeveloped.Inprimitivereligions,wearetold,ritescomebefore deities,whoareapersonificationandprojectionofthecommunalemotionsofthosewhocelebratetherites. Thatishowitappearstosophisticatedscholars.Totheprimitivethiasos howeverthecentreoftherite,that gavetheriteitspurposeandvalidity,wasnoabstractpersonification,butapersonwithamindandwillof hisown.Andpossiblythethiasos knewbest. Inmorefullydevelopedsocietiesmediumshipoffersfavourableopportunitiesforwatchingtheworkingsofthe groupmind.Accordingtothe"ectoplasmic"viewofphysicalphenomenaheldbysomeeminentmenlike Richet,theforceneededtoproducethephenomenaisgeneratedpartlybythemediumandpartlybythe sitters.Someoftheinstancesthatthebelieversin"ectoplasmy"havequoted,thematerialisationsofEva C.,forinstance,wereverydubious,buttheremayallthesamebesomethinginthenotionofcollaboration ofmediumandsittersinstimulatingparanormalactivity.Intrancemediumship,wherethephenomenaare lesssuspect,theforceisofcourseofadifferentorder. Itisnothowevernecessarytohaverecoursetomediumsinordertoobservetheemergenceofan interpersonalintelligence,onasmallscaleindeedandinconditionsthatdonotfavourdefiniteproof.The oldfashionedpracticeoftabletiltinghasfallenintodisuse,regrettablyIthink.Ihaveonvariousoccasions joinedwithfriendsinthispractice,andhavereadreportsoftabletilting,planchetteorotherformsof automatismasconductedbyothergroups.Theexperiencegainedinthiswayhasleftonmetheclear impression,inamatterwhereproofisnottobeexpected,thatduringtheprocessofautomatismand throughitanadhocintelligenceemergeswhichisnottheintelligenceofanysinglememberofthegroup.I usethewordintelligence,asIhavepreviouslyusedthephrasescriptintelligence,noncommittally. Whateveritisthatemergesistoorudimentaryandtransienttobecalledapersonality,butifmyimpression

    iscorrect,wehavehereacluethatwillhelpustounderstandphenomenathat,onamuchlargerscale, suggesttheexistenceandactivityofagroupmind.Itisamisfortunethatsolittleseemsbeingdoneat presentinthewayofexperimentalautomatismbygroupsoffriendswillingtogiveopenminded,critical attentiontothepsychologicalaspectsoftheresults.Onefurtherqualificationmustbeadded,thattheyhave nobiasagainstanentirelyqualitativeassessmentoftheproduct. ForgroupphenomenaonalargerscaleonemustturntothescriptsoftheSPRgroupofautomatists discussedinthetwoprecedingchapters.Theyareinfactthelargestpieceofconnectedmaterialin psychicalresearch,largestinrespectofthevolumeofscripts,thelengthoftime,overthirtyyears,during whichtheywereproduced,andthenumberofautomatistsinvolved,aboutadozen,ifafewwhomademinor contributionsareincluded.Theyarealsonotableforthedistinguishedabilityofseveralbothofthe automatistsandoftheinterpreters,forthecarefulnessofthedocumentation,andaboveallfortheir complexityandthemanycuriousproblemsthattheyraise. Thescriptswhichhavealreadybeenpublishedamount,withthecomments,toawholeliterature,andthere arealargenumberstillawaitingpublicationwhenfavourablecircumstances,includingfinance,permit.For judginghowevertherelationsofthegrouptothepersonscomposingorconnectedwithitthepublished materialisfullysufficient.Thegroupsituationhereishighlycomplex,asthereisnotsimplyonegroup involved,butthreeinterconnectedgroups,thoseoftheCommunicators,theautomatistsandthe interpreters.Ineachgroupsomeofthememberswerelinkedbytiesoflove,friendshiporkinship,withsome othersofthesamegroup,andalsowithsomeothersofeachoftheothertwogroups.Thisnaturally increasedtheneedforcareinpreventingunintentionalleakagebetweentheautomatists,whohadinfactfor themostpartveryslightnormalconnectionswitheachother,anditalsoincreasedthedifficultyofthe interpreters,indecidinghowmuchallowanceshouldbemadeforunavoidableleakage,e.g.through publicationofearlyscriptswhilelateroneswerebeingproduced,andforlatentmemory.Fortunatelythey weremenandwomenofsuperhumanpertinacity.Butthemultipleemotionalrelationspervadingthethree groupsmayverywellhavebeenanessentialconditionfortheproductionofparanormalworkofthissize, complexityandduration. Theoutstandingfeaturesofthescriptsofthegroupwere(1)theevidenceofdesign,andofadesigner outsidethegroupofautomatists,providedbythecrosscorrespondencessomeexamplesofwhichhave beendiscussedinChapterXIII(2)theevidenceofapurposecommontothegroupandsetoutcrypticallyin acommonsymbolicschemepersistingduringthewholedurationofthescripts,i.e.from1901to1930or later,asexplainedinChapterXIV(3)referencestoeventsnotnormallyknowntotheautomatistinwhose scripttheyoccur,forexamplesofwhichsee'LadyBalfour'srecentlypublishedpaper,ThePalmSunday CaseinProc .52,Part189.Besidesthesethereareremarkableinstancesofothertypesofmaterial,the productofasingleautomatistratherthanofthegroup,suchasthecaseofMyers's"posthumous"message (Proc .52,I)andtheStatiusandEarofDionysiuscases(Proc .XXVII,XXIX). Theautomatistsdifferedamongthemselvesintherelativeemphasislaidintheirscriptsonthe Communicatinggroupasagroupandonitsseparatemembers.Personalisationoftheseparate CommunicatorsisstrongestwithMrs.Willett,andfaintestwithH.V.andMrs.StuartWilson.Thedifference seemstocorrespondtotheirdifferencesoftemperament,Mrs.Willettbeingmorepronetosubconscious dramatisationthantheothers,anditisthereforesuperficial.InsubstancetheCommunicators,thoughvery closelyboundtogetherasagroup,areclearlyrepresentedasnotcompletelymergedinit.Eachdrawson hisownmemoriesandassociations,andsomeofthemarerepresentedasusingtheirspecialabilitiesto furtherindifferentwaysthecommonpurpose. InhisadmirablepapersonthesurvivalproblemintheJournaloftheAmericanSPRfor1945Gardner Murphystressestheneedfordistinguishingbetweenevidencethatpointstoa"static"survival,andevidence supportingtheconceptionofsurvivalofanactivekind,theonlykindthatwouldbegenerallyrecognisedas survivalinanytruesense.Thischapterandthetwoprecedingonesareintendedtoshowaparticular instanceofactivesurvivalonalargescale,namelyinagroupthemembersofwhichpromotetheirpost mortemactivitiesthroughthatgroup,andconveyinformationastothoseactivitiesbymeansofthe subconsciousactivitiesofanothergroup,thatoftheautomatists. Thepsychicalresearchercansayasmuchasthat,butnomore,withoutsteppingoutsidehislegitimate province,andhecansayitwiththesupportofevidencethatisnotopentoreasonablecriticismofits genuineness,ofthecarewithwhichithasbeenrecordedandverified,oroftheskillwithwhichithasbeen interpreted.Thelastpointisimportant,asunlesstheinterpretationofthecrypticlanguageofthescriptsis

    substantiallyright,theargumentIhaveputforwardisseriouslyweakened. ToPhantasmsoftheLiving(1886)theauthorsprefixedthreelinesofGreekversethemeaningofwhichis thatwisemenreceivethehighesttruthsthroughoracularriddlesfromwhichdullardslearnnothing.Itwas doubtlessoutofpolitenessthattheauthorslefttheselinesuntranslated.Noquestionofpolitenessnow arises,foragenerationthatfindsWilliamBlakeandJamesJoyceeasyreadingcouldnotpossiblyboggleat theoracularriddlesofthescripts.Allthatisneededispatiencetomasterthesymbolicscheme,as expoundedinseveralpapersinSPRProceedings ,andwillingnessforatimetoforgetFreud.Itisofcourse apertinentquestionwhythescriptsdonotsayaplainthinginaplainway.Piddington'ssuggestion,that theintentionwastopreventtheautomatistsguessingprematurelytheinnermeaningoftheirownscripts, seemstomeborneoutbytheincreasingexplicitnesswithwhichoveralongperiodcertaintopicsare referredto. Itwillnodoubthavebeennotedthatlittleofpositiveevidencecitedinthisbookisofrecentdate.Thatthisis soismostregrettableItislargely,1think,duetothewideninggap,noticeablesoonaftertheendofthe FirstWorldWar,betweenpsychicalresearchandpsychotherapeutics.Freud'simmensecontributiontothe understandingofthesubconsciouswasfromanearlydaterecognisedbypsychicalresearchandhe, personally,wasalwaysfriendlytotheSPR,ofwhichhewasaCorrespondingMemberfrom1911.Many howeverofhisleadingfollowerschosetoadoptanattitudeofdoctrinairesuperciliousnesstowardspsychical research,whichmadecooperationimpossible.Theclimaxcamein1924afterhehadwrittentoErnest Jones,hismostprominentsupporterintheUnitedKingdom,sayingthattheimpressionmadeonhimbythe reportsoftheGilbertMurrayexperimentswassostrongthathewould"evenbepreparedtolendthesupport ofpsychanalysistothematteroftelepathy".Thissoalarmedhissupportersthattheyputpressureonhim tosoftpedalhisinterest.Thepublicwerepermittedtolearnthesefactsforthefirsttimein1958,thirtyfour yearsaftertheyoccurred,andnineteenyearsafterFreud'sdeath. TherearewelcomesignsthatayoungergenerationofFreudiansaremorewillingtofollowFreud'sline,butit wasdisastrousthatforsolongthepsychoanalyticschoolshouldhavenarroweditsenquiryintothe subconsciousbyrejectingsovaluableakeytoitastelepathy,andhavealsorefusedallcooperationwith psychicalresearcherswhowerepursuingtheirownenquiriesintothesamesubjectinnolessscientifica spiritandwithlongerexperience.Howmuchmaterialcamethewayofthepsychoanalystsandfailedto yieldalltheinformationaboutthesubconsciousthatcouldhavebeengainedbyexaminationfromtheangle ofpsychicalresearch,weshallneverknow. Noraxepsychicalresearchersaltogetherfreefromblameinnarrowingtheirownenquiriesbyconcentrating themalmostexclusivelyforthelasttwentyyearsonmaterialsuitableforquantitativeassessment.Thisisa usefullineofresearchwhichhasyieldedimportantresults,butitexcludesfrompurviewallbutthesimplest mentalprocessesandeverythingtingedwithemotion.Enquirydirectedtotheparanormalmanifestationsof complexandemotionalthinkingmustproceedconcurrently,ifpsychicalresearchisnottoabandonthat explorationofhumanpersonalitytowhichit,andnootherbranchofscience,iscommitted.Hereagainthe signsarenotunhopeful.Therenewedactivityinthecollectionandanalysisofspontaneouscases,suchas thosedescribedinChaptersIIIandIV,isawelcomebeginning.

    Chapter16:Zoar:"IsitnotaLittleOne?"Gen.XIX
    W.H.Salter THEEVIDENCEsetoutintheprecedingchaptersandthediscussionofitwouldbealtogether inadequateasthesolebasisofajudgmentastothesurvivalofpersonalityafterthedeathofthebody.For suchajudgmentamanwouldhavetotakeintoaccountotherorganisedsystemsoffactandinferencefrom fact,andalsotheimpressionleftonhimbytheexperiencesofhiswholelife,viewedasobjectivelyashe couldmanagetoviewthem.Thesevarysomuchfrompersontopersonastomakeituselesstoattemptto relatethemtothehypothesisofsurvivalputforwardinthisbook. Thereisofcourseasubjectiveelementintheorganisedsystemstoo.Factsaredrybones.Inferenceis neededtogivethemlife,andinferenceimpliessubjectivity.Differenttheorists,workingonfactsaccessible toallofthem,cananddoproduceverydifferentsystems.Thisistrueofthesystemswithwhichpsychical researchhastheclosestcontacts,scienceandreligion. Asbetweenscienceandpsychicalresearchthepointatissueistelepathy,whichisacceptedasareal facultybymostpsychicalresearchers,includingsomescientistsofgreatdistinction,andisrejectedbyso largeasectionofscientistsastojustifyone,forthesakeofbrevity,inspeakingofitasrejectedby science.Forotherformsofextrasensoryperceptionthantelepathythereisindeedevidence,butinrelation tothesurvivalhypothesisputforwardintheprecedingchapteritistelepathy,asafacultydependentonthe combinedactivityofmorethanmeintelligence,thatisofprimaryimportance. Theconflictingviewsoftelepathyheldbyscientistsingeneralandbymanypopularwriterspresenta situationthatmuststrikeeverystudentofpsychicalresearchasludicrous.Onepartyrejectsandtheother acceptstelepathy,theonlycommongroundbetweenthembeingthatneithergivesanyindicationofhaving madeastudyoftheevidencesufficienttojustifyeitherapositiveoranegativeconclusion. Theevidenceastotelepathyisvoluminousandvaried,consistingofrecordspartlyofquantitative experimentsinextrasensoryperception,partlyofexperimentswith"freematerial",andverylargelyof sittingswithtrancemediumsandautomaticwritinginwhichtheexperimentalelementisslight,notto mentionreportsofapparitionsandother"spontaneouscases"inwhichitiswhollyabsent.Thenumberof personswhoare,oreverhavebeen,wellinformedastothewholeofthismaterialisextremelysmall,andI hastentoaddIamnotoneofthem.Theweightoftheevidencecannothebrushedasidebysuggestions that.somepersonofunblemishedcharacterfakedtheresults,orthatsomeexperiencedinvestigator omittedtofollowaprocedurefavouredbyhislessexperiencedcritic,orevenbyproofthatsomebody somewherehasdoneasumwrong.Anegativejudgmenttocarryanyweightmustdealwiththewholeof theevidenceandmustrestonarecognitionthatsubjectmattersovariedrequiresforitsproperstudy equallyvariedmethods,someofwhichwillbeunfamiliartopersonstrainedinenquiriesintomaterialofa differentkind. Astopositivejudgments,facileacceptanceofpsychicalphenomenabypopularwritershasalsobeen harmful.Themischiefhasbeenworst,perhaps,wherethesubjecthasbeenofakindlendingitselfto sensationaltreatment,hauntedhousesforinstanceandthephenomenaofthesanceroom.Comparedwith these,telepathyis,superficiallyatleast,lackinginthrills,buttheimplicationsofitareofsuchfarreaching importancethatoneatleastoftheformsinwhichitappearstomanifestitselfoughttobestudied,and studiedintensively,byanyoneinterestedinthementalsideofhumanlife.Ifthestudyofoneformgavea positiveresultthatwouldsufficetoestablishtherealityofthefaculty.Studyoftheotherforms,solongas theenquirermerelywishedforproof,wouldthenbeunnecessary,buttheresultswouldincreasehis understandingofaproblemwhichisinpartsadmittedlyobscure.Ifontheotherhandeitherthefirstformhe studiedoranyhestudiedlatergavenegativeorinconclusiveresults,thenitwouldbeacaseforsuspension ofjudgmentuntilhehadexaminedalltheforms,supposinghisleisureandpatiencetoholdoutlong enough. Thecommonandverynaturaldislikeofentertaininganideaforeigntoone'spreconceivednotions,and perhapssubversiveofthem,isdoubtlessattherootofmuchoftheoppositiontotelepathyandofthe unwillingnesseventoexaminetheevidence.Itishoweverpossibletoformulateanargumentagainstitin

    termsthatareasonable,fairmindedcriticmightuse,somewhatasfollows: "Iadmittheabilityoftheinvestigatorswhoseenquirieshaveledthemtopronounceinfavourof telepathy,andIwillassume,forthesakeofargument,thattheevidenceforit,takenbyitself, isasstrongasyouclaim.Ihavenotgiventothestudyofitthetimewhichyousayitrequires. Butotherinvestigators,ofequalability,andenjoyingsuperiorfacilitiesforresearch,working onothermaterial,havereachedconclusionsincompatiblewiththeexistenceofafacultyofthe kindyouassert.Irefertotheinterrelationofphysicalandmentalprocesses,demonstrated bycurrentresearchinevergreaterdetail." Ofthisinterrelationeveryoneisaware,onasmallscale,fromhisownexperienceifhehasattemptedto writeadifficultletterwhensufferingfromaheavycold.Butasfarasalaymancanjudgefrom pronouncementsofeminentscientiststheydonotyetclaimtoheabletoaccountforallmentalactivityin physicalterms.Anargumenttherefore,thatnotransmissiveortransfusiveactcouldtakeplacebetweentwo ormoreintelligenceswithoutcorrespondingactivitybythebodiesassociatedwiththem,involvessome admixtureofinferencewiththefactsestablishedbyresearch.intheargumentfortelepathyontheother handthefactsgivemoredirectsupportandrequirelessassistancefrominference,sothatinthepresent stateofknowledgetheaffirmativeviewisthemoreobjective. Acaseis,however,precariousifitrestsontheassumptionthatavigorousflowingtidewillslackenbeforeit isendangered.Itmaynotbeidletospeculatehowthecasefortelepathywouldstandifresearchatsome futuretimeestablishedsocompleteaninterrelationbetweenbodilyandmentalprocessesastorender untenabletheinference,atpresenttherationalinference,thatthetelepathicprocessisnonphysical.Such ahypotheticalconclusionmightbereachedwithoutdiscoveringwhatphysicalprocessinparticularwas concerned.Inthateventthepositionoftelepathyasamethodofcommunicationbetweenintelligences otherwisethanbyanyofthechannelsofsenserecognisedatthattime,wouldremainuntouched.There wouldthenhavetobecooperationbetweenphysiologistsandpsychicalresearcherstodiscoverwhatthe physicalprocesswas,reviewingforinstancetheold"wave"hypothesis,whichatpresentseemstorun countertotheevidence. Thattelepathy,asdescribedabove,isarealfacultyisplacedbeyondreasonabledoubtifacomprehensive viewofthewholeevidenceforitistaken.Whetherithasaphysicaloranonphysicalbasis,and,ifphysical, ofwhatkind,arequestionswhichintheirwiderimplicationsareinterestingandimportant,butirrelevantas regardstheargumentforsurvivalsetoutinthisbook.Theessentialpointisthattelepathy,whateverits basis,asaforceworkinginterpersonallyamongalivinggroup,cangiverisetomentalactivitiesso distinctivelycharacteristicofadeadmemberofthegroupastohebestdescribedasduetohisdiscarnate intelligence:further,thattheactivitiesinquestionincludenotonlyrevivedmemoriesofverifiableevents knowntofewbesideshimself,andunknowntothepersonthroughwhomtheyarecommunicated,but,of moreimportance,theinitiationandexecutionofdesignsofthekinddescribedinthethreepreceding chapters. Whiletherearesomeaspectsofpsychicalresearchthatarenaturallyrepugnanttoanyonewhomeets them,andnotleastofcoursetothepsychicalresearcherwhoismoreawareofthemthanthegeneral public,thereareothersthathehasnoreasontolikebuthaslearnttotolerateasinevitablebyproductsof activitiesthatareonbalanceofvalue.Inthefirstgroupcomesfraud,ofwhichnomoreneedbesaidthan thatthereareinseveralcountriessocietiespledgedtotheexaminationofpsychicalphenomena"without prejudiceorprepossessionofanykind",toquoteoncemorethemanifestooftheFoundersoftheSPR, whichcanputtheenquireronapathfreefromthatpitfall. Thesecondgroupconsistsoftheoftentediousandapparentlypointlessmaunderingstobefoundinthe "communications"receivedthroughtrancemediumsandautomatists.Itfrequentlyhappensthatasittingor ascript,productiveofmaterialworthstudy,showsinitsearlierpartstuffofthiskind.Thismaybecompared withtheconfusednoisesanorchestramakeswhentuningupbeforeaconcert,oritmightbesaidthatthe subconscioushastoclearitsthroatbeforeitcanachievetheenunciationpropertothedeliveryofits message. Thequalification"apparentlypointless"wasusedadvisedly.Muchprobablyisinfactpointlessbut appearancesmaybedeceptive.Nonsense,asLewisCarrollshowed,maybethemosteffectivevehiclefor conveyingsense.Thereisnotmuchsurfacemeaninginthecluesofacrosswordpuzzle,iftaken separately.Crossworddevoteesconfidentlyhopethatincombinationtheclueswillyieldthemanorderly

    patternofintelligiblewords.Theautomaticscriptsof"theSPRgroup"are,Ihavenottheslightestdoubt,a puzzleonaverylargescaleindeed,butofaslightlydifferentkind.Thecluesarethere,intheformof recurrentquotations,orrecurrentcrypticallusionstovarioustopics.Andjustasinacrosswordpuzzlethe sameletterformspartoftwowords,oneread"down"andtheother"across",sointhescriptsthesame quotationorallusionmayserveadualpurposeinrelationtotwodifferenttopics.Butwhilethecrossword givesapatternofseparateandusuallyunrelatedwords,thepatternofthescripts,immenselycomplexasit is,consistsintheinterconnectionofthevariousquotations,allusions,personalreferencesandtopicsintoa coherentwhole. Withsubconsciousnonsensemaybegroupedtriviality,theoccurrenceofwhichinmessagespurportingto comefromthedeadhasoftengiven.muchoffence.Totakeoneoutofhundredsofinstancesthathave occurred,onherfirstvisittoEnglandMrs.PipergaveOliverLodgeasittingatwhichadeaduncleofhiswas theCommunicator.Aspartoftheevidenceofhisidentitymentionwasmadeofasnakeskinwhichhewas saidtohavepossessedasaboy(Proc .VI,515).Itisanobviousenoughcriticismthatifthereispersonal survival,thedeadwillnotaftermanyyearsbothertorememberortalkaboutsuchtrivialchildishaffairs.But, ashasoftenbeenpointedout,amanwhoispreventedbycircumstancesfromfree,directcommunication withhisfriends,towhomhecanneverthelesssendanoralmessagethroughathirdparty,couldchooseno betterwayofauthenticatingthemessagethanbyincludinginitmentionofsometriflingaffairknownto himselfandtheintendedrecipient,butnottotheintermediaryoranyonelikelytohaveconcoctedaspurious message. Thatcommunicationscontainabsurditiesandtrivialitiesforwhichnoreasonablejustificationcouldbefound ishighlyprobable.Butcommunicationsshouldnotbediscreditedoffhandonaccountofapparentdefectsof thiskindwithoutcarefulconsiderationoftherelationoftheoffendingpassagestothewholeandofthe possibilitythatthereissomegoodreasonfortheirbeingwheretheyare. Areligiouslymindedpersonwhoreadsrecordsofsittingsmaycomeacrosspassagesthatarenotonly obnoxiousinageneralwaybecauseoftheirtriviality,butarefromhisstandpointparticularlydistastefulas cheapeningbytheirshallowassurancethewholequestionofhumanexistenceorasrepugnanttothe orthodoxdoctrinesofhisfaith.ForexamplesofthelastoneneedlooknofurtherthantheSpiritTeachings ofStaintonMoses,mentionedinanearlierchapter. Manyreligionsdrawadistinctionbetweentwoordersofthings,naturalandsupernatural,thelatterbeingan orderinwhichtheordinarymethodsofenquiry,legal,historicalandscientific,havenovalidity.Without pausingtoconsiderhowfarthedistinctionisitselfvalid,itisconvenienttoadoptitforthepurposesofthe presentdiscussion,andpsychicalresearchhasrecogniseditinlikemannerbysubstitutingtheword "paranormal"asdefiningthescopeofitsenquiriesfortheearlier"supernormal",whichwasliabletohe confusedbythepublicwith"supernatural". Inpursuitofresearchwithinthenaturalordereveryenquirermustusethemethodsforascertainingfacts thatexperiencehasshowntobeusefulinrelationtofactsofthekindheisstudying,andmustdrawwhat seemtohimthemostprobableinferencesfromthosefacts,regardlessofwhetherhis factsandhis inferencesappeartoconflictwiththefactsfoundandtheinferencesdrawnbyenquirersintoother departmentsofthenaturalorder,orwithanyteachingsorbeliefs,howeverbased,astothesupernatural. Thatisbothhisrightandhisdutyasresearcher.Butthatdoesnotmeanthatasahumanbeinghemustor shouldformhisconclusionsonquestionsofgeneralhumaninterest,suchasthesurvivalofpersonalityafter thedeathofthebody,solelyanhisownsystemoffactsandinferences,orindeedsolelymthetotalityof factsprovedwithinthenaturalordertogetherwithsuchinferencesasthosewhohaveestablishedthefacts havedrawnfromthem.Hemustofcoursetakeallthatintoaccountsofarasheknowsit,beingonhis guardagainstthecertainintrusionintoitofasubjectiveelement.Butitisproperforhimalsototakeinto accountallhisownexperienceoflife,includingwhateverhehaslearntfromreligiousleaders,philosophers andpoets.Herethesubjectiveelementislikelytobegreaterbutmoreobvious,andthereforeless dangerous. Thetheoryofsurvivalputforwardinthisbookisbasedonnatural,butparanormal,factsofaparticularkind andoninferencesthatcanreasonably,Iwouldsaythatmustalmostinevitably,bedrawnfromthem.Its relationtoanothersystemofnaturalfact,mainlyphysiologicalfact,andinferencehasalreadybeen discussed.Itremainstoconsideritsrelationtotheteachingsastothesupernaturalofreligioussystems, especiallythosethataretheistic.

    ItwouldbesheermockerytoofferthistheoryasasatisfactionOf.oranalternativeto,thehopeof immortality,toaskseekersforZiontobecontentwithZoar.'Meshortcomingsofthetheory,iftakenas,the lastwordonsurvival,wouldfromthereligiousanglebeveryobvious.Itsaysnothingabouttherelationofthe humansoultotheDeity,orastotheeffectofconductinthislifeonthestateofthesoulinthelifetocome. Iftheevidenceonwhichthetheoryisbasedisaccepted,thereisnoassuranceofanyfutureexistence exceptofamostimpermanentkind,ofadurationshorterthanthenaturaltermoflifeinthebody. Thesecriticismswouldhetothepoint,didtheynotrestonamisconceptionofwhatthetheoryclaimsto be.Notheoryfoundedonfactsofthenaturalordercoulddealwiththemattersmentionedinthepreceding paragraphwithoutpushinginferencemuchbeyondtheproperlimit.Psychicalresearch,inparticular,hasno ambitiontoclaimterritorythatlawfullybelongstorevelationormysticalexperience,orpossiblyto metaphysics.Thequestiontheniswhetherthetheory,keepingwithintheproperboundariesofpsychical research,isagoodneighbourtotheoccupantsofadjacentgroundtowhichitlaysnoclaim.Doesit,in otherwords,notonlyfallshortofreligiousdoctrine,astothedurationandmoralaspectsoflifeafterdeath, butruncountertoit?Thereisnouniformityofteachingastothefuturelifeamongthedifferentworld religions,orevenamongthedifferentChristianbodies.Substantialdivergenceswereboundtooccurwhen thephilosophiccautionwithwhichSt.Paulspeaksofthespiritualbodycametobefusedwiththeperfervid imageryoftheApocalypse.Tomentiononedenominationalone,someingenuityseemsneededto harmonisetheviewsexpressedorimpliedondifferentpagesofHymnsAncientandModern. TheChurchesarehoweverunanimousinteachingEternity,aconceptionwhichmayimplymorethanan indefiniteextensionofTime,butisincompatiblewithanythingless,certainlyincompatiblewiththenarrow timelimitoftheevidencesupportingthistheory.Thatevidencecoversaboutsixtyyearsfromthefirstdeath inthecommunicatinggrouptothelatestofthecommunications,aperiodlonger.thananycoveredbyany otherparanormalevidencethatneedbetakenseriously.OnemustexcludealltheancientChinamenand Egyptianswhoprofesstospeaktheirlanguageswiththepronunciationprevalentthousandsofyearsago,a matteronwhichscholarsdisclaimcertainty.Nor,ofcourse,amIspeakingofanycommunicationsforwhich asupernaturaloriginisclaimed. Theimportantthingistokeepclearlyinmindthedistinctionbetweenexistence,assuch,andtheabilityto giveevidenceofexistence.Theabilitytogivethecommunicationsonwhichthistheoryismainlyfounded dependedontherebeingatthesametimetwogroupsoflivingpersons,theautomatistsandthe interpreters,havingindifferentwaysanddegreesakeeninterestinthedeadmenandwomenwhoformed thethirdgroup,thatoftheCommunicators.Butonthesuppositionthatthescriptsdoestablishtheir continuedexistence,theCommunicatorsmusthavebeenexistingduringalltheyearsbetweentheirdeaths thefirstofthemdiedin1875and1901,whenthefirstcommunicationscamethroughMrs.Verrall.Itwas Myers'sdeathafewweeksearlier,andMrs.Verrall'skeeninterestinhimthatactivatedthegroupof automatists.SomeofthemembersofthatgroupwerehoweverinterestedinsomeoftheCommunicators whohaddiedbeforeMyers,andasimilarinterestwasmorewidelydiffusedamonglivingpersonswhowere notmembersofthatgroup.Theconditionsforactivesurvivalwerethereforepresentbeforetheconditions favouringcommunicationcameintobeing. TheSPRgroupofautomatistsisnottheonlychannelthroughwhichhavecomecommunicationsdeserving seriousconsideration.TrancemediumssuchasMrs.PiperandMrs.Leonard,tonametwowhohavebeen investigatedwithparticularthoroughness,shouldnotbeoverlooked.Theparticularforminwhich communicationscamethroughtheSPRgroupwasduetothatgroup'scloseconnection,inwaysalready explained,withthecommunicatingandinterpretinggroups,but,givenindividualmediumsofsufficientpower, thistheorydoesnotplaceanydifficultiesinthewayofapersonwho,duringhislife,hassharedthe intellectualandemotionallifeofhisfriendsbeingabletogiveevidenceofhiscontinuedexistenceand activity. Absenceofcommunicationdoesnotinanywayimplyeithernonexistenceorinactivity.Communication dependsonfriends,stillaliveonearth,havingthedesiretoreceivemessagesfromthefriendwhoisdead, andthegoodfortunetogetintouchwiththerightsortofmedium,ofwhomtheremayatanytimebefew. Thefriend'sactivesurvivaldependsonthelinksoffriendshipheforgedwhenstillalive. Itdepends,infact,ontheextenttowhichhehasduringhislifebrokenoutofaclosedegocentriccircle,and itsbasisisthereforemoral.Menmayindeedassociateforevilaswellasforgood.Twoproverbsarein point,andbotharetrue.Onesays,"Thereishonouramongthieves,"andtheother,"Whenthievesfallout honestmencomebytheirown".History,andnotleastrecenthistory,hasprovidednotableexamplesof

    politicalsystemswhich,inflagrantdefianceofacceptedmoralprinciples,havehadnonethelessalongrun. Theyhavegainedpowerandbeenpreservedfromcollapsethroughthesupportofdecentpeople,whose generousemotionsofcourage,loyaltyandcomradeshiptheyhavesuccessfullyexploited. Harmoniousassociationforacommonenddoesnotamongthelivingmeantheextinctionofdifferencesof opinionordivergenciesofpersonalcharacter,quitethecontrary.Thereisthennothingatvariancewithwhat weobserveineverydaylifeinthenotionofasurvivalwhichisatoncepersonalandinterpersonal.Ifitwere asked,"Withinwhatframeworkistheinterpersonalelementeffective,agroupofthedeadman'sfriendsstill livingonearth,oragroupofkindreddiscarnateintelligences?"theanswerwouldbethatboththe interpersonalandthepersonalelementsaremosteffectivewhenthetwogroupsinterpenetrateinthewayof whichthevariousgroupsconcernedwiththeautomaticwritingsdiscussedinthethreeprecedingchapters areacomplexexample. Zoarisindeednocontinuingcity.AsseenfromPisgah,itliesontheborderofthePromisedLand(Deut. XXXIV,3),butfromitthefurtherreadcannotbediscernedbynaturalsight.Someideahoweverofthatroad mayperhapshegainedfromthedirectionthattheroadalreadytravelledhastaken.Thereis,tostartwith,a personalitydividedfortheconvenienceofbodilylifeintotwoparts,consciousandsubconscious,with imperfectthoughcontinuouscommunicationbetweenthem.Betweenthispersonalityandother personalitiessimilarlydividedcommunicationisforbothofthemmainlyontheconsciouslevel,andis intermittentandliabletomisconstruction,notwithstandingsuchsubconsciouslinksbetweenthetwoas maytoagreaterorlessextentmaintaincontinuityandcheckmisunderstanding. Inplaceofthisstateofdivisiontheargumentfoundedontheevidencesetoutinpreviouschaptersoffersan integratedintelligence,inwhichtheprevioussubconscioushasabsorbedwhateverofconsciousnessserved morethantheimmediateneedsofthebody,drawingvigourfromthefriendsstillinthebodywithwhomit was,andis,unitedby"thetelepathiclaw",asMyersputit,ofloveandfriendship,andablewithoutletor hindrancetojoinwithotherintegratedintelligencesinfurtheranceofwhateveractivitiestheyall,andtheir livingfriends,holdofsupremeimportance.Itsexistenceisatthisstagebothpersonalandinterpersonal. Zoarthen,forallitssmallness,isnotwhollyinsignificant.Itslimitationsmayinfactcommenditinquarters thatwouldrejectamoredetailedplanofthePromisedLandwitheveryfencedcityaccuratelysited.Isit certainthatifDantehadbeenborninthenineteenthcenturyinsteadofthethirteenthandhadrecordedhis visioninthetwentieth,inverseofequalmagnificence,hispoemwouldhavereceivedfromthereligiousworld theacclamationthatcenturieshavebestowedontheDivinaCommedia? Uptothispointtheargumenthasbeenkeptwithinthelimitsofthenaturalorder,theonlyevidencecitedto supportitconsistingoffacts,unfamiliarindeedtomostpeople,butcapableofbeingtestedinthesame manneraswetesttheaffairsofeverydaylife.Buthereevidenceofthatkindfailsus,asitdidinChapterVII whensomeoftheaspectsofcreativeimaginationcametobediscussed.Thepurposetherewastoconsider subconsciousactivityasitshowsitselfincontextsnotinvolvingparanormalpowersofthemediumistictype, asapreparationforunderstandingtheroleofthesubconsciousinmediumship.Theexamplestherequoted showedthatinspirationwasalwaystheproductofsubconsciousactivityofexceptionalforcebut,inthe psychicalsense,ofanormalkind.Consciousnessplayedapartthatvaried,sometimesasactive collaborator,but,whereinspirationreacheditspeak,asmereamanuensis.Thatstatewasaccompaniedby asensationofcontactwithsomePowerorBeingexternaltothepercipientandgreaterthanhe,calledby MiltonUrania,sistertotheEternalWisdom,byShelleytheOne,whoseattributesareLight,Beauty, BenedictionandLove,byTennysonThatWhichIs.AnditmaybesignificantthatbothforShelleyand Tennyson,whosephilosophieswereverydifferent,theexperienceofcontactwiththePoweristhe culminationoftheexperienceofcontactwiththesoulofadeadman. Everyenquiryintothenaturalorder,psychicalresearchincluded,mustrestrictitselftoevidencefalling withinthatorder,butspeculationastotherelationofthatevidencetomattersoutsidethenaturalordermay bepermissible.ItisobviousthattheexperiencessetoutinChapterVII,thehumbleronesandthemore exaltedalike,havesomeconnectionwiththeexperiences,sometriflingandsonicfarotherwise,described inthefollowingchapters.Indulginginalittlelibertyofspeculation,Iwouldsaythatthereisaveryclose connectionbetweenthemoreelaborateformsoftrancemediumshipandautomatismdescribedinChapters XIIXVandtheinspirationofthepoets,leavingasidethequestionofliterarymerit,whichisnotheretothe point.Ifso,Zoar,thoughitisnotZion,maynotbesofarfromitafterall. Somuchforspeculation.Toreturntothenaturalorder,theproblemofsurvivalisonlypart,thoughan

    importantpart,ofthesubjectmatterwithwhichpsychicalresearchhastodeal.Thereareotherpartsless obscurethatshouldarouselessacuteemotion.Psychicalresearchgrewupinthelastquarterofthe nineteenthcentury,when"theconflictbetweenReligionandScience"ragedfuriously.Publicinteresttended toconcentrateontheexchangeofincivilitiesbetweenBishopsandProfessors,buttherewasmoreatissue thanthat.Bothpartieshavereadjustedtheirfronts.Adivinewhoshould,inFatherKnox'sphrase,make "thecredibilityoftheBibledependontheedibilityofJonah"wouldarouseaslittleenthusiasmamonghis colleaguesaswouldaphysicistwhoassertedthattheuniverseconsistedofnothingbutetherandatoms. Anuneasytrucehassupervened,butnotsofarastableentente. Inthiscontroversypsychicalresearch,whichhasconsistentlyescheweddogmatism,hasneverbeen directlyconcerned,butithasaccumulatedaverylargebodyoffactbearingonthepointsatissue.Perhaps ifbothsidespaidrathermoreattentiontothesefactsthan,withafewhonourableexceptions,theyhave eitherofthemdone,asubstantialapproachmightbemadetoafullanddurableagreement.TheSPRhas numberedamongstitsactivemembersinthisandothercountriesalistofmenandwomendistinguishedin variousbranchesofscience,inphilosophy,scholarshipandpublicaffairs,thatwouldbenodiscredittoany societythatspecialisedinanyofthesesubjects.Noonetherefore,howevereminent,heheArchbishopor PresidentoftheRoyalSociety,needbeapprehensivelest,ifhetakesupthestudyofpsychicalresearch, hewillbethrustintocontactwithintelligencesinferiortothosewithwhichhehabituallyassociates.Norof coursewillhebeinvitedtoacceptanydoctrinecontrarytohisexistingstateofbelief.Ifhoweverheisto profitfromhisstudies,twothingsareessential,first,thatheshouldtakethemupwithanopenmind,and, second,thatitshouldbepsychicalresearchthathestudiesandnotthevarioussubstitutesthatsometimes passunderthatname.HewillnotgofarwrongifhereadswhattheSPRhaspublishedonanybranchofthe subject,takingboththeprosandthecons,andextendinghisreadingtotheworkofothersocietiesinother countriesthatconformtothestandardstheSPRestablishednearlyeightyyearsago. Itisastothefirstcondition,thenecessityforanopenmind,thatthescientistseemstomeusuallytofail. If,forinstance,hetakesanynoticeoftelepathy,hisreactionwillprobablybethatoftherusticonfirst seeingagiraffe,"Therebaintnosuchanimile".Yetmuchofthevariedevidencefortelepathyresultsfrom theuseofquantitativemethodsthatshouldappealspeciallytohim,andthereareproblemsconnectedwith itinthesolutionofwhichhistrainingwouldbeofimmensehelp.Theimportantbearingoftheseproblemson biologyhasmorethanoncebeenemphasisedbySirAlistairHardy,andthesamemaybetrueastoother branchesofscience. Morevitalstillisthesignificanceoftelepathywithregardtohumanrelations,socialandpolitical,national andinternational.Thisisamatterthatconcernseveryone,butthereligiousworldespecially,asgivinga fullermeaningtothesayingthatweareallmembersoneofanother.Thatistrue,whetherthespecially closelinkbetweenmanandmanthatresearchintelepathyhasshowncanbeassignedtosomephysical processatpresentunidentifiedor,asmostpsychicalresearchersholdandashasbeenarguedinthis book,theprocessisnonphysical.Ifthelatterviewoftelepathyiscorrect,thenamaterialisticviewofthe universeisuntenable.Thereare,ofcourse,otherargumentsagainstmaterialism,butnonefoundedon verifiablefactsofthenaturalorderthat,onthepresentevidence,aresodirectorconclusive. Itisthereforeextraordinarythattheclergyasawholeshouldholdalooffromresearchintoamatterthat wouldseemofvitalconcerntothemandtotheviewoflifetheyexpound.Whentheyshowanyinterestin psychicalresearch,assomefewofthemdo,theytoooftenbecomeuncriticalenthusiastsforthetypeof phenomenawherefraudhasbeenmostrampant,sanceroommaterialisationsforinstance,orwhere,asin "psychichealing",theresultscallforinterpretationwiththehelpofspecialisedknowledgethattheydonot possess.Individualclergymenofvariousdenominationshave,itshouldberecognised,madevaluable contributionstotheworkoftheSPR. Amongthesciencespsychicalresearchisacomparativenewcomer.TheSocietywasfoundedin1882 roundanucleusoffriendswhomHenrySidgwick,thefirstPresident,andFredericMyersbegantocollectin 1874.TwoyearsbeforethatSidgwickhadwrittentoMyers: "Isometimesfeelwithsomewhatofaprofoundhopeandenthusiasmthatthefunctionofthe Englishmindwithitsuncompromisingmatteroffactnesswillbetoputthefinalquestiontothe Universewithasolid,passionatedeterminationtobeansweredwhichmustcometo something." ItwillsoonbeeightyyearssincetheSocietywasformed,nolongperiodoftimewhenthenoveltyand

    obscurityofthesubjectistakenintoaccount,thefewnessoftheactiveworkersthoughnowrecruitedfrom manycountriesbesidesEngland,thescantinessofthematerialresourceswithwhichtheyhavehadto work,thelackofcloseconnectionwithestablishedacademicenquiry,andtheabsenceofsupportfromany oftheprofessions.Noneoftheseworkerswouldbesoboldastoassertthatthe"finalquestion"hadbeen puttotheUniverse,athingwhichcouldnotbedoneuntilafterthecompleteexplorationofhuman personality,towhichthey,andonlythey,arecommitted.Theymighthoweverwellclaimthattheir"solid, passionatedeterminationtobeanswered"infaceofalltheirdifficultieshadmadeitpossibletoformsome ideawhatshapethatquestionmusttake.Theworldisfacedwithproblemsofmoreimmediateurgency,but withnonethatonalongviewismorevital.

    You might also like