Uranie. English

by Camille Flammarion

  I.

  TELEPATHY.

  The magnetic seance at Nancy had left a strong impression on my mind. Ioften thought of my departed friend and his investigations in theunexplored domains of nature and life, of his sincere and originalanalytical researches on the mysterious problem of immortality; but Icould not think of him now without associating him with the idea of apossible reincarnation in the planet Mars.

  This idea seemed to me to be bold, rash, purely imaginary if you like,but not absurd. The distance from here to Mars is equal to zero for thetransmission of attraction; it is almost insignificant for that oflight, since a few minutes are enough for a luminous undulation totravel millions of leagues. I thought of the telegraph, the telephone,and the phonograph; of the influence a hypnotizer's will has on hissubject many kilometres distant; and I wondered if some marvellousadvance in science might not suddenly throw a celestial bridge betweenour world and others of its kind in infinity.

  For several evenings I could not observe Mars through the telescopewithout my attention being diverted by many strange fancies. Still, theplanet was very beautiful, as it was during all the spring of 1888.Extensive inundations had taken place upon one of its continents, uponLibye, as astronomers had observed before in 1882, and under variouscircumstances. It was discovered that its meteorology and climatologyare not the same as ours, and that the waters which cover about half ofthe planet's surface are subject to strange displacements andperiodical variations, of which terrestrial geography can give no idea.The snow at the boreal pole had greatly diminished,--which proves thatthe summer on that hemisphere had been quite hot, although less elevatedthan that of the southern hemisphere. Besides, there had been very fewclouds over Mars during the whole series of our observations. But itwill be hardly credible that it was not these astronomical facts,however important they might be, and the base of all our conjectures,which most interested me,--it was what the hypnotized man had told me ofGeorge and Iclea; the fantastic ideas flitting through my brainprevented me from making a truly scientific observation. I persistentlywondered if communication could not exist between two beings very farremoved from each other, and even between the living and the dead; andeach time I told myself that such a question was of itself unscientific,and showed a positive spirit.

  Yet, after all, what is what we call "science"? What is not "scientific"in Nature? Where are the limits of positive study? Is the carcase of abird really a more scientific thing than its lustrous, colored plumageand its song with its subtle tones? Is the skeleton of a pretty womanmore worthy of admiration than her structure of flesh and her livingform? Is not the analysis of the mind's emotions "scientific"? Is it notscientific to try to find out whether the mind can see to a distance,and in what manner? And then, how much reason is there in this strangevanity, that we imagine that science has told us all; that we know allthere is to know; that our five senses are sufficient to appreciate thenature of the universe? From what we can make out among the forcesacting about us,--attraction, heat, light, electricity,--does it followthat there may not be other forces which escape us, because we have nosenses to perceive them? It is not this hypothesis which is absurd, itis the simplicity of pedants. We smile at the ideas of the astronomers,philosophers, physicians, and theologians of three centuries ago; threecenturies hence, will not our successors laugh in their turn at theaffirmations of those who pretend to know everything now?

  The physicians to whom fifteen years ago I communicated some magneticphenomena observed by myself during some experiments, all confidentlydenied the reality of the facts. I met one of them recently at theInstitute. "Oh!" said he, not without a certain wit, "then it wasmagnetism; now it is hypnotism, and we are studying it."

  Moral. Do not deny anything as a foregone conclusion. Let us study anddiscover; the explanation will come later.

  I was in this frame of mind, pacing up and down my library, when my eyeschanced to fall on a pretty copy of Cicero which I had not noticed forsome time. I took up a volume of it, opened it mechanically at the firstpage I came to, and read the following:--

  "Two friends arrive at Megara and take separate lodgings; one of them has hardly fallen asleep before he sees his travelling companion beside him, telling him sorrowfully that his host has formed a plan to assassinate him, and begging him to come to his assistance as quickly as possible. The other awakes; but satisfied that he has had a bad dream, loses no time in going to sleep again. His friend appears to him again, and conjures him to hasten, because the murderers are coming to his room. More puzzled, he is astonished at the persistency of this dream, and is on the point of going to his friend; but reason and fatigue triumph, and he goes to bed again. Then his friend comes to him for the third time, pale, bleeding, disfigured. 'Wretch,' said he to him, 'you did not come when I implored you; it is all over now. Avenge me. At sunrise you will meet a cart loaded with manure at the city gate: stop it, and order it to be unloaded; you will find my body hidden in the middle. Give me an honest burial, and pursue my murderers.' So great a tenacity, such minute details, admitted of no further delay or hesitation; the friend rises, hurries to the gate mentioned, finds the wagon there, stops the driver, who is frightened; and soon after the search begins, the body of his friend is found."

  This story seemed to come expressly to strengthen my opinion in regardto the unknown quantities in the scientific problem. Doubtlesshypotheses are not lacking in reply to the point in question. It may besaid that perhaps the circumstance never happened as Cicero tells it,that it has been amplified and exaggerated; that two friends coming to astrange city may fear an accident, that fearing for a friend's lifeafter the fatigue of a journey, in the middle of the quiet night, onemight chance to dream that he is the victim of an assassin. As to theepisode of the cart, the travellers may have seen one standing in theirhost's court-yard, and the principle of the association of ideas comesin to bring it into the dream. Yes, these explanatory hypotheses may bemade; but they are only hypotheses. To admit that there had really beenany communication between the dead man and the living one is also anhypothesis.

  Are facts of this kind very rare? It seems not. I remember, amongothers, a story told me by an old friend of my boyish days, Jean Best,who, with my eminent friend Edouard Charton, founded the _MagasinPittoresque_ in 1883, and died a few years ago. He was a grave, cold,methodical man, a skilful typographical engraver, and a carefulbusiness man. Every one who knew him knows how little nervous he was bytemperament, and how foreign to his mind were things of the imagination.Well, the following incident happened to him when he was a child betweenfive and six years old.

  It was at Toul, his native place. He was lying in his little bed onebeautiful evening, but was not asleep, when he saw his mother come intohis chamber, cross it, and go into the adjoining drawing-room, whosedoor was open, and where his father was playing cards with a friend.Now, his mother was ill at Pau at that time. He at once rose from hisbed and ran to the drawing-room after his mother, where he looked forher in vain. His father scolded him somewhat impatiently, and sent himback to bed again, assuring him that he had been dreaming.

  Then the child, thinking that he must have been dreaming, tried to go tosleep again. But some time afterwards, lying with his eyes open, hedistinctly saw his mother pass him for the second time; only now hehurried to her and kissed her, and she at once disappeared. He did notwant to go to bed afterwards, and remained in the drawing-room, wherehis father continued to play cards. His mother died at Pau the same dayat that very hour.

  I have this circumstance from M. Best himself, who remembered itclearly. How explain it? It may be said that, knowing his mother wasill, the child often thought of her, and had an hallucination whichhappened to coincide with his mother's death. That is possible. But itmay be thought, too, that there was some sympathetic link between themother and child, and at that solemn moment the mother's soul may reallyhave been in communication with her child. How? one may ask. We knownothi
ng about it. But what we do not know, is to what we know in theproportion of the ocean to a drop of water.

  _Hallucinations!_ That is easily said. How many medical works have beenwritten upon this subject! Everybody knows that of Brierre de Boismont.Among the numberless incidents which it relates, let us cite the twofollowing:

  "Observation 84. When King James came to England at the time of the London plague, being at Sir Robert Cotton's house in the country with old Camden, he saw, in a dream, his oldest son, who was still a child living in London, with a bleeding cross on his forehead, as if he had been wounded by a sword. Frightened at this apparition, the king began to pray; in the morning he went to Camden's chamber and told him the events of the night; the latter reassured the monarch, telling him he had nothing to torment himself about. That very day the king received a letter from his wife announcing the death of his son, who had died from the plague. When the child appeared to his father, he had the height and proportions of a grown man.

  "Observation 87. Mlle. R., a person of excellent judgment, religious, but not a bigot, lived before her marriage at her uncle's house, D., the celebrated physician and a member of the Institute. She was away from her mother, who was attacked by violent illness in the country. One night this young person dreamed that she saw her, pale, disfigured, very near death, and showing deep grief at not having her children with her, one of whom, the curate of a parish in Paris, had emigrated to Spain, the other being in Paris. Soon she heard herself called by her christian name several times; in her dream she saw the persons who were with her mother, thinking she called her little granddaughter, who had the same name, go into the next room for her, when a sign from the sick woman told them it was not she, but her daughter who lived in Paris, whom she wanted to see. Her face showed the grief she felt at the daughter's absence; suddenly her features changed, the paleness of death spread over her face, and she fell back lifeless on her bed.

  "The next morning Mlle. R. seemed very sad to D., who begged to know the cause of her grief. She told him all the particulars of the dream which had so greatly distressed her. D., finding her in that frame of mind, pressed her to his heart, acknowledging that the news was only too true, that her mother had just died; he did not enter into further particulars.

  "A few months afterwards Mlle. R., profiting by her uncle's absence to put in order his papers, which, like many other savants, he disliked to have touched, found a letter to her uncle relating the circumstances of her mother's death. What was her surprise to read all the particulars of her dream!"

  Hallucination! Fortuitous coincidence. Is that a satisfactoryexplanation? At all events, it is an explanation which explains nothingat all.

  A host of ignorant persons, of all ages and trades, clerks, merchants ordeputies, sceptics by temperament or habit, simply declare that they donot believe these stories, that there is nothing true about them. Thatalso is not a very good solution of them. Minds accustomed to studycannot content themselves with so trifling a denial. A fact is a fact;we cannot refuse to admit it, even when we cannot in the present stateof our knowledge explain it.

  Of course medical annals acknowledge that there is really more than onekind of hallucination, and that certain nervous organizations are theirdupes. But there is a wide gulf between that and concluding that allpsycho-biological phenomena are hallucinations.

  The scientific spirit of our century rightly seeks to free all thesefacts from the deceptive fogs of supernaturalism, inasmuch as nothing issupernatural, and Nature, whose kingdom is infinite, embraceseverything. During the last few years a special scientific society hasbeen organized in England for the study of these phenomena,--the Societyfor Psychical Research. It has at its head some of the most illustrioussavants on the other side of the Channel, and has already sent outimportant publications. These phenomena of sight at a distance areclassed under the general title of Telepathy (tele, _far_, pathos,_sensation_). Rigorous inquiries are made to verify their testimony. Itsvariety is very great. Let us look through one of these collections[2]together for a moment, and take out a few of the documents which areduly and scientifically established.

  In the following recently observed case, the observer was as wide awakeas you and I are at this moment. It is about a certain Mr. Robert Bee,who lives at Wigan, England. Here is the curious revelation, written bythe observer himself.

  "On the 18th of December, 1873, my wife and I went to visit my wife's family at Southport, leaving my parents to all appearance in perfect health. The next afternoon we were strolling on the beach, when I became so depressed that it was impossible for me to interest myself in anything whatever, so that we soon returned to the house.

  "All at once my wife showed signs of great uneasiness, and said she was going to her mother's room for a few moments. A minute afterwards I rose from my armchair and went into the drawing-room.

  "A lady in walking costume came towards me from an adjacent sleeping-room. I did not notice her features, because her face was turned away from me; still, I spoke to her, and greeted her at once, but I do not remember now what I said.

  "At the same time, while she was passing before me, my wife was coming from her mother's chamber, and walked right over the place where I saw the lady, without seeming to notice her. I said at once, in great surprise, 'Who is that lady whom you just met?' 'I met no one,' replied my wife, still more astonished than I was. 'What!' I replied, 'do you mean to tell me that you did not see a lady this very minute who passed by just where you are now? She probably came from your mother's room, and must be now in the vestibule.'

  "'It is impossible,' she said; 'there is positively no one in the house at this moment but my mother and ourselves.'

  "Sure enough. No strange lady had been there, and the search which we immediately began was without result.

  "It was then ten minutes to eight o'clock. The next morning a telegram informed us of my mother's sudden death from heart-disease at exactly that hour. She was then in the street, and dressed precisely like the unknown lady who had passed in front of me."

  Such is the observer's story. The inquiries made by the Societyfor Psychical Research have proved its absolute authenticity andthe agreement of the witnesses. It is as positive a fact as ameteorological, astronomical, philosophical, or chemical observation.How can it be explained? Coincidence, you will say. Can a strictscientific criticism be satisfied with this word?

  Still another case.

  Mr. Frederick Wingfield, living at Belle-Isle en Terre (Cotes-du-Nord),writes that on the 25th of March, 1880, having gone to bed rather late,after reading a part of the evening, he dreamed that his brother, livingin the county of Essex, in England, was with him; but instead ofanswering a question asked him, merely shook his head, rose from hischair, and went away. The impression was so strong that the narratorsprang from his bed half asleep, awaking as his foot touched the floor,and called his brother. Three days later he received news that hisbrother had been killed by a fall from his horse the same day, March25th, 1880, in the evening, about half-past eight o'clock, a few hoursbefore the dream just reported.

  An inquiry proved that the date of this death was exact, and that theauthor of this narrative had written his dream in a diary at the verydate of the event, and not afterwards.

  Still another case.

  "Mr. S. and Mr. L., both employed in a Government office, had been intimate friends for eight years. Monday, 19th March, 1883, L. had an attack of indigestion at his office. He went to a druggist's, where he was given some medicine, and was told that his liver was affected. The following Thursday he was no better; Saturday of that same week he was still absent from the office.

  "On Saturday evening, March 24th, S. was at home with a headache; he told his wife that he was too warm, which he had not
been before for two months; then, after making this remark, he went to bed, and shortly after he saw his friend L. standing before him, dressed as usual. S. noticed even this particular about L.'s clothes, that he had a black band on his hat, and that his coat was unbuttoned; he also had a cane in his hand. L. looked directly at S. and passed on. S. then remembered the sentence in the book of Job, 'A spirit passed before my face; the hair of my flesh stood up.'

  "At that moment he felt a chill run all over his body, and felt the hair rise on his head. Then he asked his wife,'What time is it?' She replied,'Ten minutes of nine.' 'I asked you,' he said, 'because L. is dead; I have just seen him.' She tried to persuade him that it was a pure illusion; but he insisted, in the most solemn manner, that nothing could induce him to change his opinion."

  This is the story as told by Mr. S. He did not learn of his friend'sdeath until three o'clock on Sunday. L. had died on Saturday evening atabout ten minutes of nine.

  Agrippa d'Aubigne's historical account of an occurrence at the time ofthe Cardinal of Lorraine's death is somewhat like this story:--

  "The king being at Avignon on December 23d, 1574, Charles, Cardinal of Lorraine, died there. The queen (Catherine de Medicis) had retired to bed earlier than usual, having at her _coucher_, among other persons of note, the king of Navarre, the archbishop of Lyons, the ladies de Retz, de Lignerolles, and de Saunes, two of whom have confirmed this report. As she was hurrying to finish her good-nights, she threw herself back on her bed with a start, put her hands over her face with a loud cry, calling to those about her for help, pointing to the cardinal at the foot of the bed, who, she said, was holding out his hand to her. She cried out several times, 'M. le Cardinal, I have nothing to do with you.' At the same time the king of Navarre sent one of his gentlemen to the cardinal's house, who reported that he had died at that very minute."

  In his book on "Posthumous Humanity," published in 1882, Adolphed'Assier guarantees the authenticity of the following statement, whichwas reported by a lady of St. Gaudens as having happened to herself:--

  "It was before my marriage," she said, "and I slept with my elder sister. One night we had just put out the light and gone to bed. The fire was still burning enough to dimly light the room. Glancing at the fireplace, to my great surprise I saw a priest seated before the fire warming himself. He was a stout man, and had the form and features of an uncle of ours, a priest who lived in the suburbs. I at once spoke to my sister. The latter looked at the fireplace and saw the same apparition. She also recognized our uncle the priest. An indescribable fright took possession of us, and we both cried 'help' as loud as we could. My father, who was sleeping in an adjoining room, aroused by our cries, rose in great haste, and soon came in with a lighted candle in his hand. The phantom had disappeared; we no longer saw any one in the chamber. The next day we learned by letter that our uncle the priest had died the previous evening."

  Another fact is reported by the same disciple of Auguste Comte, and sentby him while living in Rio de Janeiro.

  It was in 1858. In the French colony of that city, people were stilltalking about a singular apparition which had taken place there a fewyears before. An Alsatian family, consisting of a husband, wife, andlittle girl, still almost a baby, sailed for Rio de Janeiro, where theywere to join some compatriots living in that city. The passage was verylong, the wife was taken ill, and lacking proper care and nourishment,did not live to reach there. The day she died she fell into a swoon,remained in that state for some time, and when she recovered her senses,said to her husband, who was watching by her side, "I die happy, for nowI am easy about the fate of our child. I have just come from Rio deJaneiro. I found our friend Fritz the carpenter's house and street; hewas standing at the door. I showed him our little girl; I feel sure thaton your arrival he will recognize and take care of her." That very day,at the same hour, Fritz the Alsatian carpenter, of whom I have justspoken, was standing at the door of the house where he lived in Rio deJaneiro, when he thought he saw one of his compatriots going along thestreet with a little girl in her arms. She looked at him entreatingly,and seemed to show him the child she was carrying. Her face,notwithstanding its emaciation, reminded him of Latta, the wife of hisfriend and fellow-countryman Schmidt. Her expression, the singularity ofher step, which seemed more like a vision than reality, struck Fritz;and wanting to be sure that he was not the victim of an illusion, hecalled one of his men who was working in the shop, and who was also anAlsatian from the same locality.

  "Look," said he; "do you not see a woman going down the street, holdinga child in her arms, and should you not say that it is Latta, our friendSchmidt's wife?"

  "I cannot say; I do not see her very distinctly," replied the workman.

  Fritz said no more; but the different circumstances of this real orimaginary apparition fixed themselves firmly in his mind, especially theday and hour. Some time after that, Schmidt, his compatriot, arrived,carrying a little girl in his arms. Latta's visit then came into Fritz'smind; and before Schmidt had spoken a word he said to him,--

  "I know all, my poor friend: your wife died during the passage. Beforeshe died, she came and showed me her little girl, that I might takecare of her. Here is the date and hour."

  It was really the day and hour noted by Schmidt on board the boat.

  In his work on the Phenomena of Magic, published in 1864, Gougenot desMousseaux reports the following incident, which he certifies asabsolutely authentic:-

  Sir Robert Bruce, belonging to the illustrious Scotch family of thatname, was mate of a vessel. One day, when sailing near Newfoundland, andwhile busy with his calculations, he thought he saw the captain seatedat his desk, but looked at him attentively, and noticed that it was astranger, whose cold, fixed look surprised him. He went on deck; thecaptain noticed his surprise, and asked him what it meant.

  "Who is at your desk?" asked Bruce.

  "No one."

  "Yes, there is some one there. Is it a stranger; and how did he comethere?"

  "You are either dreaming or joking."

  "Not at all. Come down and see for yourself."

  They go down to the cabin, but there is no one at the desk. The ship isthoroughly searched, but no stranger is found.

  "And yet the man I saw was writing on your slate; the writing must bethere still," said he to the captain.

  They looked at the slate; it bore these words: "Steer to thenorthwest."

  "This must be your writing, or some one's else on board the ship."

  "No; I did not write it."

  Every one was told to write the same sentence, and no handwritingresembled that on the slate. "Very well," said the captain; "we willobey these instructions and steer the ship to the northwest; the wind isright, and will admit of our trying the experiment."

  Three hours later, the watch perceived an iceberg, and near it a vesselfrom Quebec, headed for Liverpool, dismantled and covered with people.They were brought off by boats of Bruce's vessel.

  As one of the men was climbing up the side of the rescuing vessel, Brucestarted, and drew back in great agitation. He recognized the strangerwhom he had seen tracing the words on the slate. He reported the strangeincident to the captain.

  "Will you write 'Steer to the northwest' on this slate?" asked thecaptain, turning to the new-comer, and offering the side which bore nowriting.

  The stranger complied with his request, and wrote the desired words.

  "Will you acknowledge that to be your ordinary handwriting?" asked thecaptain, struck with the similarity of the two sentences.

  "Of course; how can you doubt it? You saw me write it yourself."

  As a reply, the captain turned the slate over, and the stranger wasamazed to see his own writing on both sides.

  "Did you dream of writing on that slate?" said the Quebec captain to theman who had just been writing.

  "No,--at least I have no remembrance
of doing so."

  "What was that passenger doing at noon?" asks the rescuer of his brothercaptain.

  "The passenger was very tired, and had fallen into a sound sleep, asnear as I remember, a little before twelve o'clock. An hour or morelater he awoke, and said to me, 'Captain, we shall be saved this veryday;' adding, 'I dreamed that I was on board a vessel coming to ourrelief.' He described the ship and its rigging, and we were very muchsurprised, when you headed for us, to recognize the exactness of thedescription."

  After a while the passenger said, "It is very strange, but somehow thisship seems quite familiar to me, and yet I was never on it before."

  Baron Dupotet, in his article on "Animal Magnetism," reports thefollowing fact, published in 1814 by the celebrated Jung Stiling, whohad it from the observer himself, Baron de Sulza, chamberlain to theking of Sweden.

  He was going home one night in summer about twelve o'clock, an hour atwhich it is still light enough in Sweden to read the finest print. "AsI reached the family estate," he said, "my father came to the entranceof the park to meet me; he was dressed as usual, and carried a canewhich my brother had carved. I greeted him, and we talked together for along time. We went into the house and up to his bedroom door together.On going into the chamber I saw my father there, undressed, when theapparition instantly faded away. A little while afterwards my fatherawoke and looked at me inquiringly. 'My dear Edward,' said he, 'God bepraised that I see you safe and well! I was greatly distressed aboutyou in my dream. I thought that you had fallen into the water and werein danger of drowning.' Now on that very day," added the baron, "I hadbeen on the river with some friends crab-fishing, and had come very nearbeing dragged down by the current. I told my father that I had seen hisdouble at the park gate, and that we had had a long talk together. Hetold me that he had often had similar experiences."

  In these various stories are seen spontaneous apparitions andappearances which were provoked, so to speak, by the will. Can mentalsuggestion go so far as that? The authors of the book mentioned above,"Phantasms of the Living," reply affirmatively by seven well-attestedexamples, of which I will present one to the attention of my readers.Here it is:--

  "The Rev. C. Godfrey, living in Eastbourne, in the county of Sussex, having read an account of a premeditated apparition, was so struck thereby that he determined to attempt it himself. On the fifteenth of November, 1886, about eleven o'clock, he concentrated the whole power of his imagination and all the strength of will of which he was master, upon the idea of appearing to a lady, a friend of his, by standing at the foot of her bed. The effort lasted about eight minutes, after which Mr. Godfrey felt very much fatigued, and went to sleep. The next day the lady who had been the subject of the experiment came of her own accord to tell Mr. Godfrey of what she had seen. When asked to make a memorandum, she did so in these words: 'Last night I awoke with a start, feeling that some one had entered my room. I heard, too, a noise which I supposed to be the birds in the ivy outside my window. I then experienced a sort of uneasiness, a vague desire to leave my room and go down to the lower floor. This feeling became so strong that at last I rose, intending to take something to quiet myself. Going up to my room again, I met Mr. Godfrey standing under the great window which lights the staircase. He was dressed as I am accustomed to seeing him, and I noticed that he was looking at something very intently. He stood there motionless while I held up the lamp and looked at him in astonishment. This lasted three or four seconds, after which I continued my way upstairs. He disappeared. I was not frightened, but very much agitated, and could not go to sleep again.' Mr. Godfrey thought, very sensibly, that the experiment which he had tried would have much more importance if it were repeated. A second attempt failed, but the third was successful. Of course the lady upon whom he operated was not apprised of his intention any more than on the first occasion. 'Last night,' she writes, 'Tuesday, December 7th, I retired to bed at half-past ten, and was soon asleep. Suddenly I heard a voice, which said, "Wake up," and I felt a hand touch the left side of my head. [Mr. Godfrey's intention this time was to make her feel his presence by voice and touch.] In an instant I was thoroughly awake. There was a curious noise, like a jews-harp, in the chamber. I felt, too, a cold breath, which seemed to envelop me. My heart began to beat violently, and I distinctly saw a figure leaning over me. The only light in the room came from a lamp outside, making a long stream of light over the toilet-table; this was darkened by the figure. I turned quickly, and it seemed as if the hand fell from my head to the pillow beside me. The figure was bent over me, and I felt it rest against the edge of the bed. I saw the arm on the pillow all the time. I could see the profile of the face but dimly, as if through a haze; it might have been about a minute and a half. The figure had slightly pushed back the curtain, but I noticed this morning that it hung as usual. There is no doubt that the figure was Mr. Godfrey's. I recognized him by the turn of the shoulders and the shape of the face. All the time that he was there, a current of cold air blew through the room as if the two windows had been open.'"

  These are _facts_!

  In the present condition of our knowledge it would be absolutelyfoolhardy to seek to explain them; our psychology is not yet far enoughadvanced. There are a great many things which we are forced to admit,without the power to explain them in any way. To deny what we cannotexplain would be pure folly. Could any one explain the world's system athousand years ago? Even now, can we explain attraction? But sciencemoves, and its progress will be endless.

  Do we know the whole extent of the human faculties? The thinker cannotfor a moment doubt that there may be forces in Nature still unknown tous,--as, for example, electricity was less than a century ago,--or thatthere may be other beings in the universe, endowed with other senses andfaculties. But is terrestrial man entirely known to us? It does not seemso. There are facts whose reality we are forced to admit, with no powerwhatever to explain them.

  Swedenborg's life offers three of this nature. Let us put aside for amoment planetary and sidereal visions, which appear more subjective thanobjective. We will remark, by the way, that Swedenborg was a savant ofthe first order in geology, mineralogy, and crystallography; a member ofthe Academy of Sciences of Upsala, of Stockholm, and of St. Petersburg;and we will content ourselves with recalling the three following facts.

  The 19th of July, 1759, this philosopher landed at Gothenburg on hisreturn from a journey to England, and went to dine with a certainWilliam Costel, where there was quite a large company. At six o' clockin the evening Swedenborg, who had gone out, came back to thedrawing-room pale and anxious; he said a great fire had at that momentbroken out at Stockholm at the Suedermoln, in the street in which helived, and that the fire was spreading rapidly towards his house. Hewent out again and returned, lamenting that a friend's house had justbeen reduced to ashes, and that his own was in the greatest danger. Ateight o'clock, after being out again, he said joyfully, "Thanks be toGod, the fire has been extinguished at the third house from mine!"

  The news of this spread throughout the city, which was all the moreexcited because the governor gave it attention, and many people wereanxious for their property or friends. Two days afterwards the royalmessenger brought a report of the fire from Stockholm; there was nodisagreement between his account and that which Swedenborg had given.The fire had been extinguished at eight o'clock.

  This anecdote was written by the celebrated Emmanuel Kant, who haddesired to make an inquiry into the facts, and who adds, "What can bealleged against the authenticity of this occurrence?"

  Now, Gothenburg is two hundred kilometres from Stockholm. Swedenborg wasthen in his seventy-second year.

  Here is the second fact:--

  In 1761 Madame de Marteville, widow of a minister from Holland toStockholm, received a demand for the sum of twenty-five thousand Dutchflorins (ten thousand dollars), from one of her husband's
creditors whomshe knew her husband had paid, and a second payment of which wouldgreatly embarrass, almost ruin her. It was impossible to find thereceipt. She went to see Swedenborg, and a week later she saw herhusband in a dream; he showed her the piece of furniture in which thereceipt had been placed, together with a hairpin set with twentydiamonds, which she also believed to be lost. "It was at two o'clock inthe morning. Greatly elated, she rose, and found everything at the placeindicated. Going back to bed, she slept until nine o'clock. About eleveno'clock, M. de Swedenborg was announced. He told her that he saw M. deMarteville's spirit the night before, and that he informed him that hewas going to his widow."

  And now for the third fact.

  In the month of February, 1772, being in London, Swedenborg sent a noteto the Rev. John Wesley (founder of the Wesleyan sect), telling him thathe should be very glad to make his acquaintance. The zealous preacherreceived the note just as he was setting out on a journey, and repliedthat he should profit by the gracious permission to visit him, on hisreturn, which would be in about six months. Swedenborg answered him"that in that case they would never see each other in this world, asthe 29th of the next month was to be the day of his death."

  Swedenborg really died on the date mentioned by himself more than amonth beforehand.

  These are three facts whose authenticity it is impossible to doubt, butwhich in our present condition of knowledge no one would be able toexplain.

  We might multiply these _authentic_ accounts indefinitely. Factsanalogous to those already mentioned of communications from a distance,whether at the moment of death or in the normal condition of life, arenot so rare--without, however, being very frequent--but that every oneof our readers may have heard such cited, or perhaps have observed themhimself in more than one instance. Besides, experiments made in therealms of magnetism show also that under certain ascertainedpsychological conditions an experimenter can act upon his subject notonly at the distance of a few metres, but of several kilometres, andeven of more than a hundred kilometres, according to the sensitivenessof the subject, as well as to the intensity of the magnetizer's will.Moreover, space is not what we suppose. The distance from Paris toLondon is great for a walker, and was even insurmountable before theinvention of boats; it is nothing for electricity. The distance from theEarth to the Moon is great for our present modes of locomotion; it isnothing for attraction. In fact, from an absolute point of view, thespace which separates us from Sirius is not a greater part of infinitythan the distance from Paris to Versailles, or from your left eye toyour right.

  There is more yet; the separation which seems to us to exist between theEarth and the Moon, or between the Earth and Mars, or even between theEarth and Sirius, is only an illusion due to the insufficiency of ourperceptions. The Moon acts constantly upon the Earth, and moves itperpetually. The attraction of Mars for our planet is equally acute, andwe in our turn disturb Mars in its course in submitting to the influenceof the Moon. We act upon the Sun itself, and make it move as if wetouched it. By virtue of attraction, the Moon causes the Earth to turnevery month around their common centre of gravity,--a point whichtravels one thousand seven hundred kilometres below the surface of theglobe. The Earth causes the Sun to turn annually around their commoncentre of gravity, situated four hundred and fifty-six kilometres fromthe solar centre; all the worlds act upon each other perpetually, sothat there is no isolation, no real separation, between them. Instead ofbeing a void separating the worlds from one another, space is rather aconnecting link. Now, if attraction thus establishes a real, perpetual,active, and indisputable communication between the Earth and its sistersin immensity, as proved by the precision of astronomical observations,we do not see by what right pretended positivists can declare that nocommunication can be possible between two beings, more or less distantfrom each other, either on the Earth or in two different worlds.

  Cannot two brains that vibrate in unison at a distance of manykilometres be moved by the same psychic force? Cannot the emotion whichstarts from a brain reach a brain vibrating at no matter what distance,just as sound crosses a room, making the strings of a piano or violinvibrate?

  Do not forget that our brains are composed of molecules which do nottouch, and which are in constant vibration. And why speak of brains?Cannot thought, will, psychic force, whatever its nature may be, act ona being to whom it is attached by the sympathetic and indissoluble tiesof intellectual relationship? Do not the palpitations of a heartsuddenly transmit themselves to the heart which beats in unison withours? Are we to admit in the cases of apparitions noted above that themind of the dead has really assumed a corporeal form when near theobserver? In the greater part of the cases this hypothesis does not seemnecessary. In our dreams we think we see persons who are not before ourclosed eyes at all. We see them perfectly, as well as in broad daylight;we speak to them, converse with them. Surely it is neither our retinanor our optic nerve which sees them, any more than our ear hears them.Our cerebral cells alone are concerned in it.

  Certain apparitions may be objective, exterior, and substantial; othersmay be subjective,--in that case the being who manifests himself wouldact from a distance on the being who sees, and this influence on hisbrain would determine the interior vision which appears exterior, as indreams, but may be purely subjective and interior. Just as a thought, amemory, may arouse an image in our minds which may be very distinct andvery vivid, just so one intelligence acting upon another may make animage appear in him which will for a moment give him the illusion ofreality. It is not the retina which is affected by a positive reality,it is the optic thalami of the brain which are excited. In what way? Thepresent state of our physiological and psychological knowledge does notyet teach us that.

  Such are the most rational inductions which it seems possible toderive from the phenomena to which we have just been giving ourattention,--unexplained, but very old phenomena; for the histories ofall peoples, from the highest antiquity, have preserved examples of itwhich it would be very difficult to deny or efface. But it will beasked, ought we, can we, admit in our age of experimental methods andpositive science that a dying or even a dead man can communicate withany one? What is a dead man?

  A human being dies every second on the whole terrestrial globe; that is,eighty-six thousand four hundred per day, about thirty-one millions peryear, or more than three milliards per century. In ten centuries morethan thirty milliards of corpses have been committed to the earth andgiven back to general circulation under the form of variousproducts,--water, gas, etc. If we keep an account of the diminution ofhuman population as we count up the historic ages, we find that for tenthousand years, _at least two hundred milliards of human bodies havebeen formed from the earth and from the atmosphere by respiration andnourishment, and have returned to it_. Molecules of oxygen, hydrogen,carbonic acid, and nitrogen, which have constituted these bodies, haveenriched the earth and been given back to atmospheric circulation.

  Yes, the Earth we inhabit is now formed partly of the milliards ofbrains which have thought, the milliards of organisms who have lived. Wewalk over the remains of our ancestors as our descendants will walk overours. The brows of thinkers; eyes which have looked, smiled, and wept;mouths which have sung of love, rosy lips, and marble bosoms; mothers'flesh and blood; the arms of toilers; the muscles of men, good andbad,--all who have lived, all who have thought, lie in the same earth.It would be difficult now to take a single step on the planet withoutwalking on the remains of the dead; it would be difficult to breathewithout inhaling the breath of the dead. The constructive elements ofthe body draw upon Nature and are returned to Nature, and each one of usbears in himself atoms which have formerly belonged to other bodies.

  Ah, well! Do you think that can be all of humanity? Do you think it maynot have left something nobler, grander, and more spiritual? Does eachof us give the universe, when we breathe our last, nothing but sixty oreighty kilos of flesh and bone which will disintegrate and return to theelements? Does not the soul which animates us endure by the same ri
ghtas each molecule of oxygen or nitrogen or iron? And all the souls thathave lived, do they not still exist?

  We have no right to affirm that man is composed solely of materialelements, and that the thinking faculty is only one property of theorganization. On the contrary, we have the strongest reasons foradmitting that the soul is an individual entity, that it is that whichgoverns the molecules to organize the living form of the human body.

  What becomes of the invisible and intangible molecules which havecomposed our body during life? They will belong to new bodies. Whatbecomes of the equally invisible and intangible souls? It may be thoughtthat they also reincarnate themselves in new organisms, each inaccordance with its nature, its faculties, and its destiny.

  The soul belongs to the psychic world. Doubtless there is on the Earthan innumerable quantity of souls, still heavy and coarse, barely freedfrom matter, and incapable of conceiving intellectual realities. Butthere are others who live in study, in contemplation, in the culture ofthe psychic or spiritual world. Those cannot remain imprisoned on theEarth, and their destiny is to live the Uranian life.

  The Uranian soul, even during its terrestrial incarnations, lives in theworld of the absolute and divine. It knows that, though dwelling on theEarth, it is really in heaven, and that our planet is a star of heaven.

  What is the inner nature of the soul? What are its ways ofmanifestation? When does its memory become permanent, and maintain withcertainty a conscious identity? Under what variety of forms andsubstances can it live? What extent of space can it overcome? What isthe order of intellectual relationship which exists among the differentplanets of the same system? What is the germinating force which sows theworld with seed? When can we put ourselves in communication with theneighboring earths? When shall we penetrate the profound secret ofdestiny? Mystery and ignorance to-day. _But the unknown of yesterday isthe truth of to-morrow._

  It is an historic and scientific fact, and absolutely incontestable,that in all ages, among all peoples, and under the most diversereligious manifestations, the idea of immortality rests invulnerable atthe base of human consciousness. Education has given it a thousandforms, but did not invent it. It exists of itself. Every human beingcoming into the world brings with him, under a form more or less vague,this inner feeling, this desire, this hope.