THE ORIGINS OF SPIRITISM

Spiritism dates from exactly 1848. It is important to note this date because various idiosyncrasies of spiritist theories reflect the peculiar mentality of the period in which they originated. It is especially in such troubled periods, owing to the accompanying mental disequilibrium, that things of this kind come to birth and develop. The circumstances surrounding the beginnings of spiritism are known well enough and have been told many times; it will therefore suffice to relate them briefly, emphasizing only those points that are particularly instructive and perhaps less familiar. We know that spiritism, along with many analogous movements, trace their origins to the United States. The first phenomena were produced in December 1847 at Hydesville, New York, in a house where the Fox family had taken up residence. The family, whose original name was Voss, was of German origin. We mention the German origin because if one day someone wishes to establish the real causes of the spiritist movement, investigation of the German side must not be neglected, as we shall shortly explain. It seems that at the beginning the Fox family played only a quite involuntary role, and that even later the family members were only the passive instruments of some force, in the manner of all mediums. Whatever the case, the phenomena in question, consisting of various noises and displacements of objects, were neither new nor uncommon, but were similar to those observed from time immemorial in what are called 'haunted houses'. What was new was the use subsequently made of these phenomena. After several months someone got the idea of posing questions to the mysterious rapper, questions to which it responded correctly. At first it was only asked arithmetical questions, to which it responded by a series of regular blows. It was a Quaker, one Isaac Post, who took it upon himself to mention by name the letters of the alphabet, inviting the 'spirit' to designate by a knock those letters that composed words which he (the 'spirit') wanted to make known, thus devising the means of communication called the spiritual telegraph. The 'spirit' declared itself to be a certain Charles B. Rosna, during life a peddler who had been slain in the Fox house and buried in the cellar, where in fact some skeletal remains were found. Moreover, the phenomena were produced especially in the presence of the Fox sisters, and it was in this way that mediumship was discovered. Among the visitors who gathered there in ever greater numbers were those who believed, rightly or wrongly, that they were endowed with the same powers. From that time modern spiritualism, as it was at first called, was founded. Its first designation was probably the most exact, but, doubtless in the interest of brevity, it most frequently came to be called simply spiritualism in the Anglo-Saxon countries. As for spiritism, the word was coined in France a little later. Soon gatherings or spiritual circles were formed where new mediums revealed themselves in great numbers. If we are to believe the communications or messages received, this spiritist movement, which had as its aim the establishment of regular relations between the inhabitants of the two worlds, had been prepared by scientific and philosophical 'spirits' during their earthly life; they had been especially occupied with researches in electricity and various other imponderable fluids. Benjamin Franklin was found to be the head of these 'spirits' and it was claimed that he often gave instructions on methods for developing and perfecting ways of communication between the living and the dead. From the very beginning, in fact, ingenuity was strained to search out more convenient and more rapid means of communication with the aid of the 'spirits'; hence, the turning and tapping tables, then the alphabetical dials, the pencils attached to baskets or to mobile boards, and other analogous instruments. The use of Benjamin Franklin's name, other than being natural enough in an American milieu, is quite characteristic of some of the tendencies manifested in spiritism. Franklin himself was assuredly not involved in this affair, but the adherents of the new movement could not do better than place themselves under the patronage of this moralist of the most incredible banality. And while on this subject let us say that spiritists have retained elements of some theories of the late eighteenth century, a time of obsession with 'fluids'. The hypothesis of an 'electrical fluid', long since abandoned, serves as an instance of many other such ideas. The 'fluid' of the spiritists so much resembles that of the mesmerizers that mesmerism itself, even though far removed from spiritism, can in one sense be regarded as a distant precursor of spiritism and as having contributed in a certain measure to its advent. The Fox family, which now believed it had a special mission to spread knowledge of spiritist phenomena, was driven from the Methodist Episcopal Church to which they had belonged. They then established themselves in Rochester, New York, where the phenomena continued and where they were at first greeted with hostility by a great part of the populace. There was even a riot during which only the intervention of one George Willets, another Quaker, prevented their massacre. This is the second time we see a Quaker playing a role in this story, and this is no doubt due to certain affinities which this sect incontestably has with spiritism. We refer not only to their humanitarian tendencies but also to the strange 'inspiration' manifested in Quaker meetings, heralded by the quaking to which they owe their name. Here we have something that singularly resembles mediumistic phenomena, even though the interpretation naturally differs. In any event, one can easily imagine that the existence of a sect such as the Quakers may have contributed to the acceptance of the first spiritist manifestations.^[1] Perhaps in the eighteenth century there was also an analogous relationship between the exploits of the Jansenist convulsionaries and the success of 'animal magnetism.^[2] The essentials of the preceding were taken from an account by an American author from whose writings many others have drawn more or less faithfully. It is curious that this author, who has established herself as the historian of modern spiritualism, ^[3] is Emma Hardinge Britten who was a member of the secret society designated by the initials ' HB of L' (Hermetic Brotherhood of Luxor), ^[4] which we have already mentioned in connection with the origins of the Theosophical Society. We say this fact is curious because the ' HB of L', although clearly opposed to the theories of spiritism, nevertheless sought to play a direct role in its founding. In fact, according to information from the ' HB of L', the first 'spiritist' phenomena were produced not by 'spirits' but by men acting from a distance by means known only to several initiates. And these initiates were, precisely, members of the 'inner circle' of the 'HB of L'. Unfortunately, in the history of this organization it is difficult to go further back than 1870, that is to say the same year in which Emma Hardinge Britten published the book just mentioned (a book in which there is of course no allusion to the topic now under consideration). Also, some have believed that in spite of this organization's claims to great age it dates only from this time. But even if this were true, it could refer only to the form the 'HB of L' had most recently adopted. In any case, it had garnered material from several other organizations which for their part certainly existed before the middle of the nineteenth century, such for example as the 'Brotherhood of Eulis' which was under the direction, outwardly at least, of Paschal Beverly Randolph, a very enigmatic personage who died in 1875.^[5] But the name and form of the organization that operated in the events we have mentioned is of little importance. We must say that the thesis of the ' HB of L', intrinsically and independently of these contingencies, seems quite plausible, and we shall now try to explain why we say this. To this end it is not inopportune to make several general observations on 'haunted houses', or what some like to call 'prophetic places'. Phenomena of this kind are far from rare, having been known from the earliest times. Examples are found in antiquity, as for example in the reports of Pliny the Younger, as well as in the Middle Ages and in modern times. Now, the phenomena produced in such cases are quite remarkably consistent. They may be more or less complex, but they share certain characteristics found always and everywhere. Moreover, the occurrences at Hydesville certainly are not to be accounted among the most remarkable, for there only the most elementary of these phenomena were observed. It is worthwhile to distinguish at least two principal cases: in the first, that of Hydesville (if what has been reported is really correct) it is a question of a place where someone has died a violent death and where, in addition, the body of the victim has remained hidden. We point out the coincidence of these two conditions because for the ancients the production of these phenomena was related to the fact that the victim had not received a regular burial accompanied by certain rites, and that only by the accomplishment of these rites after the body was found could these phenomena be brought to an end. This is what Pliny the Younger says, and there is something in his account that must hold our attention. In this connection it would be very important to determine just what the manes ^[6] were, and also what the ancients understood by several other terms that were in no way synonymous, although our contemporaries no longer know how to distinguish among them. Research in this area could clarify the question of evocations in a quite unexpected manner, and we shall return to this question below. In the second case, it is not a question of a death or, to retain the indistinctness belonging to this new order, manifestations proceeding from a death, but rather the action of a living man. There are typical examples of these in modern times which have been carefully documented in all their details, the one most often cited and now something of a classic being the case of the presbytery of Cideville in Normandy, from 1849 to 1851, only a short while after the events at Hydesville, that is, at a time when the latter was still relatively unknown in France.^[7] These were plainly phenomena with all the characteristics of sorcery, which could not be of interest to the spiritists except in that they seemed to furnish a confirmation of the theory of mediumship, understood in a rather broad sense. The sorcerer who wishes to take revenge on the occupants of a house must touch one of them, who afterward becomes his unconscious and involuntary instrument and will serve as 'support' for an action which henceforth can be exercised at a distance, although only when the passive 'subject' is present. This is not mediumship in the sense in which the spiritists understand it since the action of which the subject is the means does not have the same origin; but it is somewhat analogous, and one may at least suppose that forces of the same kind are brought into play in both cases. This is what is claimed by contemporary occultists who have studied the facts and who, it must be said, have all been more or less influenced by spiritist theory. In fact, ever since spiritism began, whenever a haunted house is reported somewhere a medium is sought, and with a little good will one or more is always found. We do not say that one is always wrong in this; but there are also examples of deserted places, such as abandoned houses, where phenomena of haunting occur in the absence of any human being, and it cannot be claimed that accidental witnesses, who often observe these things only from a distance, have played the role of mediums. It is unlikely that the laws governing certain forces, whatever they may be, have been altered, so that we assert against the occultists that the presence of a medium is not always a necessary condition, and that here as elsewhere one must be wary of prejudices that risk falsifying one's observations. We will add that haunting without a medium applies to the first of the two cases we have cited, for a sorcerer would have no reason to go to an uninhabited place, and it may be furthermore that in order to act he might have need of conditions not required for phenomena produced spontaneously, even though the phenomena appear to be nearly the same. In the first case, which is that of true haunting, the production of these phenomena is attached to the very place that has been the scene of a crime or accident, and where certain forces are found to be permanently condensed; it is therefore the place itself that should be the principal focus of attention. It is in no way improbable that the action of the forces in question might at times be intensified by the presence of persons endowed with certain characteristics, and it is perhaps thus that the happenings at Hydesville occurred, assuming again that the facts have been accurately reported, which we have no particular reason to doubt. In this case, which seems explicable by 'something' we have not defined that comes from a dead person, but is certainly not the spirit of the deceased if by spirit one understands the superior part of the being, must the explanation exclude all possibility of the intervention of living men? We do not believe this necessarily to be the case, and we do not see why a pre-existent force could not be directed and utilized by certain men who know the laws involved. It seems that this might be relatively easier than to exert influence where no previously existing force of this kind existed, which nevertheless is what a simple sorcerer does. Naturally, one might suppose that 'adepts', to borrow a popular Rosicrucian term, or initiates of a higher rank, not only have means of action superior to and different from those of sorcerers, but also have different ends in view. As regards the last remark, we should note that there can be many kinds of initiates, although at the moment we are considering these things in a quite general way. In a peculiar address given before an assembly of spiritists, cited in extenso in our history of Theosophy, ^[8] Annie Besant claimed that the 'adepts' who had stirred up the spiritist movement were served by the 'souls of the dead'. As she proposed to attempt a rapprochement with the spiritists, she seemed more or less sincerely to take the expression 'souls of the dead' in the spiritist sense. But we who have no mental reservations at all of a 'political' character may understand her in a completely different sense as referring to that 'something' just mentioned. It seems to us that this interpretation agrees much better than any other with the thesis of the 'HB of L'. This is of course not the most important thing for us, but this observation makes us think that the members of the organization in question, or at least its directors, certainly know where to focus in the matter. In any case, they certainly know better than Mme Besant, whose thesis, despite the correction she made, was not much more acceptable to the spiritists. In light of this, moreover, we believe it exaggerated to involve 'adepts' in the strict sense of the word, but we repeat that it is possible that the initiates, whoever they may have been, provoked the Hydesville phenomena by making use of favorable conditions they found there, or that they may at least have imparted a certain direction to the phenomena after these had already begun. We make no assertion in the matter, saying only that there is nothing impossible in what we have said, in spite of what some might think. But let us add that another hypothesis seems simpler, which is not to say it is necessarily more true, namely that the agents of the organization in question, whether the ' HB of L' or any other, were happy to take advantage of what happened in order to create the 'spiritist' movement, acting by a kind of suggestion on the inhabitants and visitors to Hydesville. This last hypothesis represents a minimum of intervention, and it is necessary to accept at least this minimum, for without it there would be no plausible reason why the consequences of the Hydesville events should have differed from those of other analogous events that had occurred previously. If such an event was, by itself, the sufficient condition for the birth of spiritism, this latter would certainly have appeared at a much earlier time. For the rest, we set little store by spontaneous movements, whether in the political or the religious order, or in a domain as ill-defined as that presently occupying us An impulse is always necessary, as are those people who subsequently become the apparent chiefs and who may often be as ignorant of the movement's true provenance as is the rank and file. But it is very difficult to say what actually occurred in a case of this kind, for this side of events is obviously not found in any documentation, and this is why historians, who want above all to rely on written records, take no account of such things and prefer to deny them purely and simply, although they represent what is perhaps most essential. In our opinion these last remarks have a quite general import, but we will let the matter rest so as not to digress too far, returning now to what especially concerns the origin of spiritism. We have said that there have been cases both similar and prior to that of Hydesville, the most similar being that which occurred in 1762 at Dibbelsdorf in Saxony, where the 'rapping ghost' responded in exactly the same way to questions put to it.^[9] If nothing else had been necessary, spiritism could certainly have come to birth in these circumstances, and so much the more in that the occasion made enough of an impression to draw the attention of the authorities and of scholars. Moreover, several years before the debut of spiritism, one Dr Kerner had published a book on the case of the 'seer of Prevorst', Mme Hauffe, in whose presence numerous phenomena of the same order were produced. It will be noted that this case, like the previous one, took place in Germany, and although there have been similar occurrences in France and elsewhere, this is one of the reasons why we have called attention to the German origin of the Fox family. In this connection it is interesting to make some other comparisons: in the second half of the eighteenth century certain branches of high Masonry in Germany took a particular interest in evocations. The best known history in this area is that of Schroepfer, who committed suicide in 1774. It was not then a question of spiritism, but magic, which is different in the extreme, as we will explain below, but it is no less true that had practices of this kind been popularized, they could have determined a movement such as spiritism as a result of the false ideas that the public at large would inevitably have formed in their regard. Certainly, from the beginning of the nineteenth century, there were other secret societies in Germany not affiliated with the Masons, which also occupied themselves with magic and evocations, as well as with magnetism. Now, the ' HB of L', or that of which it was the heir, was precisely in keeping with certain of these societies. Data on this can be found in an anonymous work entitled Ghost Land, ^[10] which was published under the auspices of the ' HB of L' and which some believe should be attributed to Emma Hardinge Britten. This is not our view, although it is likely that she edited the work.^[11] We think there is good reason to investigate these societies and the results obtained could contribute significantly to clearing up certain obscurities. Nevertheless, if the spiritist movement was first promoted in America rather than Germany, it is probably because it was likely to find a more favorable ambiance in that country than anywhere else, as is proved by the prodigious proliferation of sects and 'neo-spiritualist' schools that has occurred there since that time and which still continues. A final question remains: what was the aim of those who originally inspired modern spiritualism? It seems that the very name given the movement makes this clear enough. It was a question of combatting the invasion of materialism, which in fact attained its fullest extent at this time, and to which a counterweight was desired; and, by calling attention to phenomena that materialism, or at least ordinary materialism, could not satisfactorily explain, it could in no way be opposed on its own ground. This could have relevance only in the modern world, for materialism properly speaking is of very recent origin, as is the state of mind that grants an almost exclusive importance to phenomena and their observation. If the aim really was what we have just set forth, then, recalling the assertions of the 'H Bof L', this is the time to return to what we said above only in passing: namely that there are initiates of very different kinds and that they may often find opposition among themselves. Thus, among the German secret societies to which we have alluded, there are some that professed completely materialist theories, although it was a materialism remarkably broader than that of official science. Of course, when we speak of initiates in this way we are not taking the word in its loftiest meaning, for we intend thereby simply men who possess certain knowledge not in the public domain. This is why we were at pains to specify that it would be wrong to suppose that these 'adepts' had to have been interested, at least initially, in the creation of the spiritist movement. This explains how contradictions and oppositions may exist between different schools. Naturally, we speak only of schools that possess real and serious knowledge even though it may be of a relatively inferior order, but which in no way resembles the many forms of 'neo-spiritism', these latter rather being counterfeit knowledge. Now yet another question presents itself: to give rise to spiritism in order to combat materialism is ultimately to combat an error by another error. Why act in this way? It might be that in the course of extending and popularizing itself the movement promptly deviated, that it escaped the control of those who had inspired it, and that it then assumed a character hardly in line with their intentions. When one tries to popularize, one must be prepared for such accidents, for they are almost inevitable. There are things that are not without impunity placed within reach of just anyone, and such popularization risks consequences that are almost impossible to foresee. In the case that concerns us here, even if the promoters had to some extent foreseen the consequences, they may have thought, rightly or wrongly, that this was a lesser evil than that they hoped to avert. For our part, we do not believe that spiritism is any less pernicious than materialism, even though its dangers are altogether different; but others may assess things differently, believing that the coexistence of two opposing errors, the one limiting the other, may be preferable to the free expansion of one of them. It could even be that the currents of ideas, as divergent as they might possibly be, may have had an analogous origin and may have been intended to serve as a play of equilibrium, characterizing a very special kind of politics. In this order, it would be very wrong to limit oneself to external appearances. Finally, if a public action of some magnitude can operate only to the detriment of the truth, there are those who will take advantage of this situation. Vulgus vult decipi [the people want to be deceived], which is sometimes completed with the words ergo decipiatur [therefore let them be deceived], and this is a more common feature of the kind of politics we have just mentioned than might at first be believed. One can thus keep the truth for oneself and at the same time spread errors that one knows to be such, but which are judged opportune. Another attitude consists in speaking the truth to those capable of understanding it, without being overly concerned with the others. Both these contrary dispositions may be justified according to circumstances, but it is probable that only the first permits a wideranging general initiative, but this is not of equal interest to everyone, and the second attitude corresponds to more genuinely intellectual concerns. However that may be, we do not appraise, we only offer as possibilities the conclusions to which we have been led by certain deductions which we cannot expound fully here, for that would lead us too far afield and make spiritism seem a quite secondary incident.^[12] For the rest, we cannot presume to resolve completely all the questions we have been led to raise; we can affirm, however, that we have certainly said far more than anyone else heretofore on the subject treated in this chapter.