These remarks have perhaps been made before in one form or other, but as much popular interest is always awakened by the supernatural, or what is supposed to be supernatural, we may go a little farther, and inquire how it was that the ghost seen by Dr. Jessopp disappeared when he raised his arm. Would any ghost be afraid of the Doctor extending his hand? The fact no doubt occurred as related. The explanation is that the narrator had been much impressed by a certain picture, which a correspondent soon identified as a portrait of “Parsons, the Jesuit Father.” The description given is that of the priest who was described by the Doctor in one of his books. The association of ideas in the library of a Norfolk house connected with the Walpoles, with whom Parsons had been a leader, gave rise, during a period of “forty winks” at midnight, to the spectre.
In the interesting letters written upon “Natural Magic” by Sir David Brewster, the subject of Spectral Illusions is treated at some length, and with undoubted authority. Sir David thought the subject worth discussing with reference to the illusions or spectres mentioned by Dr. Hibbert. Sir David Brewster gives his own experiences which occurred while he was staying at the house of a lady in the country.
The illusions appear to have affected her ear as well as the eye. We shall see in the next chapter how intimately sound and light are connected, and how the eyes and ears are equally impressed, though in a different way, by the vibration of particles. The lady referred to was about to go upstairs to dress for dinner one afternoon, when she heard her husband’s voice calling to her by name. She opened the door, and nobody was outside; and when she returned for a moment to the fire she heard the voice again calling, “Come to me; come, come away,” in a somewhat impatient tone. She immediately went in search of her husband, but he did not come in till half an hour afterwards, and of course said he had not called, and told her where he had been at the time—some distance away. This happened on the 26th December, 1830, but a more alarming occurrence took place four days after.
About the same time in the afternoon of the 30th December, the lady came into the drawing-room, and to her great astonishment she perceived her husband standing with his back to the fireplace. She had seen him go out walking a short time previously, and was naturally surprised to find he had returned so soon. He looked at her very thoughtfully, and made no answer. She sat down close beside him at the fire, and as he still gazed upon her she said, “Why don’t you say something!” The figure immediately moved away towards the window at the farther end of the room, still gazing at her, “and it passed so close that she was struck by the circumstance of hearing no step nor sound, nor feeling her dress brushed against, nor even any agitation of the air.” Although convinced this was not her husband, the lady never fancied there was anything supernatural in the appearance of the figure. Subsequently she was convinced that it was a spectral illusion, although she could not see through the figure which appeared as substantial as the reality.
Were it advisable, we could multiply instances. In the Edinburgh Journal of Science these, and many more instances of spectral illusions were narrated by the husband of the lady. She frequently beheld deceased relatives or absent friends, and described their dress and general appearance very minutely. On one occasion she perceived a coach full of skeletons drive up to the door, and noticed spectral dogs and cats (her own pets’ likenesses) in the room. There can be no doubt upon these points; the appearances were manifest and distinct. They were seen in the presence of other people, in solitude, and in the society of her husband. The lady was in delicate health, and very sensitive. The spectres appeared in daylight as well as in the dark, or by candle-light.
Let us now, guided by what we have already written, and by Sir David Brewster’s experience, endeavour to give a rational explanation of these illusions. “The mind’s eye is really the body’s eye, and the retina is the common tablet upon which both classes of impressions are painted, and by means of which they receive their visual existence according to the same optical laws.”
“In the healthy state of mind and body the relative intensity of the two classes of impressions on the retina are nicely adjusted—the bodily and mental are balanced. The latter are feeble and transient, and in ordinary temperaments are never capable of disturbing or effacing the direct images of visible objects.... The mind cannot perform two different functions at the same instant, and the direction of its attention to one of the two classes of impressions necessarily produces the extinction of the other; but so rapid is the exercise of mental power, that the alternate appearance and disappearance of the two contending impressions is no more recognized than the successive observations of external objects during the twinkling of the eyelids.”
We have before illustrated, by means of the pen and the ink-bottle, how one object is lost sight of when the other is attentively regarded, and a material picture or scene may be equally lost sight of, and a mental picture take its place in the eye, when we recall places or people we have seen or remembered.
We have all heard numerous anecdotes of what is termed “absent-mindedness.” Some people are quite absorbed in study, and can see or hear no one in the room when deeply occupied. We may be satisfied then that “pictures of the mind and spectral illusions are equally impressions upon the retina, and only differ in the degree of vividness with which they are seen.” If we press our eyes the phosphorescence becomes apparent, and we can make a picture of the sun or a lamp visible for a long time to our closed eyes if we stare at either object for a few seconds, and shut our lids. So by increasing the sensibility of the retina we can obtain the image, and alter its colour by pressure on the eye.