Getting a rise out of ectoplasm

In his book After Death -- What? Researches in Hypnotic and Spiritualistic Phenomena (1909; Aquarian Press edition 1988), turn-of-the-century scientist Cesare Lombroso recounts the experiments that led him from a strictly materialist worldview to a belief in spirits and life after death. One of the most striking chapters is Lombroso's account of "seventeen séances held in Milan in 1892 ... séances in which the most marked precautions were taken, such as searching the medium, changing her garments, binding her and holding her hands and feet, and adjusting the electric light on the table so as to be able to turn it off and on at will." (pp. 40-41)

The subject of these experiments was the controversial Sicilian medium Eusapia Palladino, who was said to be able to levitate tables, make musical instruments play themselves, produce cold winds in a sealed room, and materialize hands and faces. Eusapia was an eccentric character known for her propensity to cheat when she thought she could get away with it, a tendency that discredited her in the eyes of many researchers. (The fact that she was a coarse, uneducated, and flirtatious peasant woman also factored into the disrepute in which she was held in genteel circles.) Nevertheless, when properly controlled and observed, she produced some remarkable phenomena, which are difficult if not impossible to explain by any normal means. Indeed, the premier magician of the day, Howard Thurston, witnessed one of Eusapia's séances and stated publicly that her phenomena could not be duplicated by any trickery known to him.

What follows are a few excerpts from Lombroso's treatment of the Eusapia sittings. It should be noted that the table used in the experiments was not Eusapia's; it was "made expressly for the purpose" by the researchers. (p. 41)

After recounting some partial levitations of the table Lombroso writes:

It was natural to conclude that if the table, in apparent contradiction with the law of gravitation, was able to rise on one side, it would be able to rise completely. In fact, that is what happened, and these levitations are among those of most frequent occurrence in experiments with Eusapia. They were usually produced under the following conditions: The persons seated around a table place their hands on it and form the chain there. Each hand of the medium is held by the adjacent hand of the neighbor on each side; each of her feet is under the foot of her neighbor; these furthermore press against her knees with theirs. As usual, she is seated at one of the short sides (end) of the table, -- the position least favorable for mechanical levitation. After a few minutes the table makes a lateral movement, rises now to the right and now to the left, and finally is lifted wholly off its four feet into the air, horizontally, as if afloat in a liquid, and ordinarily to a height of from 10 to 20 centimetres (sometimes, exceptionally, as high as 60 or 70), then falls back on all four feet at once. Sometimes it stays in the air for several seconds, and even makes fluctuating motions there, during which the position of the feet under it can be thoroughly inspected. During the levitation the right hand of the medium frequently leaves the table with that of her neighbor and remains suspended above it. Throughout the experiment the face of the medium is convulsed, her hands contract, she groans and seems to be suffering.

In order better to observe the matter in hand we gradually retired the experimenters from the table, having noticed that the chain of several persons was not at all necessary, either in this or in other phenomena. In the end we left only a single person besides the medium, and placed on her left. This person rested her feet on the two feet of Eusapia, and one of her hands on the latter's knees. With her other hand she held the left hand of the medium, whose right lay on the table in full view of all, or was even lifted into the air during the levitation.

Inasmuch as the table remained in the air for several seconds, it was possible to secure several photographs of performance. [Two of these are included in the book.]

A little before the levitation it was observed that the folds of the skirt of Eusapia were blown out on the left side so far as to touch the neighboring leg of the table. When one of us endeavored to hinder this contact, the table was unable to rise as before, and was only enabled so to do when the observer purposely allowed to contact to occur. It will be noticed that the hand of the medium was at the same time placed on the upper surface of the table on the same side, so that the leg of the table there was under her influence, as much in the lower portion by means of the skirt as in the superior portion through the avenue of the hand. No verification was made as to the degree of pressure exerted upon the table at that moment by the hand of the medium, nor were we able to find out, owing to the brevity of the levitation, what particular part was in contact with the garment, which seemed to move wholly in a lateral direction and to support the weight of the table.

In order to avoid this contact it was proposed to have the levitation take place while the medium and her coadjutors stood on their feet, but it did not succeed. It was also proposed to place the medium at one of the longer sides of the table. But she opposed this, saying that it was impossible. So we are obliged to declare that we did not succeed in obtaining a complete levitation of the table of all four of its legs absolutely free from any contact whatever, and there is reason to fear that a similar difficulty would have been met in the levitation of the two legs that stood on the side next the medium. [pp. 43-46]

While performing some experiments with a balance, the same "blowing out" of the medium's garment was observed.

In this experiment of the balance, also, it was noticed by some of us that success seemed to depend on contact of the garments of the medium with the floor upon which the balance was directly placed. The truth of this was established by a special experiment on the 9th of October. The medium having been seated on the balance, that one of our number who had taken upon himself to watch her feet soon saw the lower folds of her dress swelling out and projecting in such a way as to hang down from the platform of the balance. As long as the attempt was made to hinder this movement of the dress (which was certainly not produced by the feet of the medium), the levitation did not take place. But as soon as the lower extremity of the dress was allowed to touch the floor, repeated and very evident levitations took place, which were designated in very fine curves on the disk that registered the variations of weight. [pp. 47-48]

The movement of the dress naturally gives rise to suspicion that some sort of fancy footwork was at play. But the researchers swore that Eusapia's feet were not responsible for the movement. If there is any reality to ectoplasm, then it may be the case that some sort of invisible ectoplasmic protuberance was causing the dress to move, and that contact between this ectoplasmic rod and the floor or table was necessary in order to achieve results.

In any case, the preceding observations pale in comparison to a phenomenon that Lombroso titles "The Levitation of the Medium to the Top of the Table."

Among the most important and significant of the occurrences we put this levitation. It took place twice, -- that is to say, on the 28th of September and the 3rd of October. The medium, who was seated near one end of the table, was lifted up in her chair bodily, amid groans and lamentations on her part, and placed (still seated) on the table, then returned to the same position as before, with her hands continually held, her movements being accompanied by the persons next her.

On the evening of the 28th of September, while her hands were held by MM. Richet and Lombroso, she complained of hands which were grasping her under the arms; then, while in trance, with the changed voice characteristic of this state, she said, "Now I lift my medium up on the table." After two or three seconds the chair with Eusapia in it was not violently dashed, but lifted without hitting anything, on to the top of the table, and M. Richet and I are sure that we did not even assist the levitation by our own force. After some talk in the trance state the medium announced her descent, and (M. Finzi having been substituted for me) was deposited on the floor with the same security and precision, while MM. Richet and Finzi followed the movements of her hands and body without at all assisting them, and kept asking each other questions about the positions of the hands.

Moreover, during the descent both gentlemen repeatedly felt a hand touch them on the head.

On the evening of October 3 the thing was repeated in quite similar circumstances, MM. Du Prel and Finzi being one on each side of Eusapia. [pp. 49-50]

The researchers' impression of being touched by "a hand" during this levitation is particularly interesting, and perhaps adds weight to the hypothesis of ectoplasmic extensions at at work.

Now, I'm well aware that there are ways of tilting a table and making it appear to levitate, though it would seem that the researchers' precautions were sufficient to prevent fraud in these particular tests. But even if Eusapia managed to fool them with regard to the table, how in the world could she simulate the levitation of herself and the chair she was sitting on -- transporting it from the floor to the table itself, and then back again, while closely observed?

Comments

[Hope Rivers]

It's interesting how mediums like Eusapia Palladino and Carlos Miribelli experience similar delevopments in physical mediumship. Both started out with alot of poltergiest activity around them, the cold winds, in Eusapia's case the blowing of her skirt open. I know when all this same stuff happened at my folks place it was put to rest with prayer and direct command to stop.

But before that things continued to esculate, like the curtains would blow out with window closed, I remember once I went to my friends mum place one night, we hit the town and I crashed there, after I left they had poltergiest activity start up at there place also, her mother called in a catholic priest for an exorcism.

I often wonder if embraced what would have happened.

[Mark]

The only possible thing that I could see wrong with this test is the two men holding her arms. They could, conceivably, have lifted her themselves. They probably did not, and were trustworthy, but this is the sort of thing people like Randi will just assume. They should have tied her up.

[John]

I agree with the hands under the arms. I don't think ideomotor effects can be to blame here. I doubt two presumably unbuilt scientific men could subconsciously (hell, even consciously), while in an inconvenient and suboptimal position, lift by the arms a woman who is described as "rotund" on to a table in a smooth manner without showing any signs of stress AND THEN pulling her down SLOWLY back in to her chair perfectly, which is even more difficult to do with your arms because slowly lowering something accurately is more straining on the muscles than slowly lifting something accurately.

And besides, this doesn't explain the table itself lifting, at all.

[Mark]

Yeah, you're probably right, John. I'm just saying it's the sort of thing skeptics will assume. Too often people will want to throw out a whole case just because of small possibilities like that...

[william]

“I'm just saying it's the sort of thing skeptics will assume.”

Skeptics always have an out no matter what precautions are taken and if they cannot find a rationalization for the phenomena they will find an excuse such as accuse the researcher of having an affair with the medium and tainting the data like they did with William Crookes. Their system of beliefs demands that they have an explanation.

[Mark]

I think that the key is whether or not the skeptic's "out" is legitimate or not, meaning whether or not the "out" has a significant likelihood of actually being true. Some of these skeptics want to portray things that have only a one in a million chance of being true as the most likely possibility. I think that they should not only have to prove that there were other possibilities, but also that those possibilities have a significant chance of actually happening.

[Vitor]

In wikipedia we have the strong impression that Eusapia was only a fraud:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusapia_Palladino

[Michael H]

That settles it, then. Everyone knows that Wikipedia is purely objective, and consequentially the bastion of absolute truth.

[Hope Rivers]

Eusapia apparently would cheat at any opportune moment, wasn't she the one that also tested naked???

Ectoplasm coming out of her!!!!?

It has been said she was very flirtatious and obviously mischievous.

No pre requisite's needed to be a physical medium, but I'm sure someone like Eusapia would have drawn in the crowds because of her antics.

Don't think table tilting would have been quite the same at another mediums seances's ;-)

[Leo]

I just read this article http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=&xml=/earth/2008/02/21/scighost121.xml
typical debunking by saying all neuroscientists believe ghosts are all in the mind and generated by it. But what if the brain is a transmitter of consciousness not the generator/producer?.

[Michael Prescott]

As far as I know, Eusapia never worked naked. She was not the most attractive woman, so I don't think nudity would have been a draw in any case ...

[John]

Leo, I think it's been driven in to the ground by now. We know the majority consensus is that consciousness is a brain-generated phenomenon. No need to bring it up every time someone expresses the other opinions.

As for Eusapia... I wouldn't be too interested in a naked séance myself!

[william]

"We know the majority consensus is that consciousness is a brain-generated phenomenon"

what majority?

[Michael H]

The majority consensus of the proponents of scientism, William. Many of whom moonlight as Wiki editors, or so it would appear. :-)

[Vitor]

I still would like to know what would be impossible to explain by wikipedia's article.

[John]

Vitor: What do you mean by that?

[Vitor]

What I wanna to say is that I think wikipedia's article can really explain Eusapia in natural ways.

[John]

So are you saying that you don't believe in Eusapia's mediumship?

[Hope Rivers]

Sorry my mistake it wasn't Eusapia who enjoyed doing it in the nuddie, it was Eva C and there's a pic of her on the net somewhere.

So everything I said earlier was relating to this lady, excuse me for my poor memory, never did say I was good at remembering names ;-)

Now she's no oil painting either and the poor woman was short changed in the chest area too, she looks like a boy and she pulls faces looking very strained,(like constipation)when the cheesecloth is coming out of particular orifices :-) You gotta laugh, I am!!

[Michael Prescott]

>What I wanna to say is that I think wikipedia's article can really explain Eusapia in natural ways.

Including the levitation of the medium and her chair from the floor to the top of the table and down again?

[Darryn]

The Wikipedia page on Eusapia is an absolute abomination.

What I found most interesting about this article, and did not know, is that Eusapia entranced referred to herself in the third person (as though an occupying entity speaketh through her): "Now I lift my medium up on the table" etc.

D.D. Home routinely spoke in this manner ("now Daniel is over here", etc.), and I doubt Eusapia knew this, illiterate peasant as she was.

[Hope Rivers]

Gees Darryn your showing your true colours boy!

Eusapia had a gift you certainly don't nor ever will, in fact she is more advanced than YOU, never judge intellect as superior over every other talent, ability or creative, artistic gift.

This blog is a perfect example of intellects who still know very little beyond their own reasonings.

[Hope Rivers]

Materialisations have been happening since Moses, just believe People's, it's a real phenomena, it hasn't gone away and will always be!

Right going to get on the treadmill now and sweat out Darryn's comment to return to my blissful state again.

[Hope Rivers]

Sorry not wanting to offend everyone here, with what I said about intellect. I just can't stand people who think they are better than anyone else because they see education/their perception of intelligence exceeding in importance or value.

Thats the height of arrogance!

[joki]

"In wikipedia we have the strong impression that Eusapia was only a fraud:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eusapia_Palladino"
I recommend Vitor S. Braude s book "The limit of Influence". There is an intensive discussion about the Maple Report. Prof. Braude has fairly and well discussed the critics of R. Wiseman some yeras ago regarding D.D. Home and Eusapia´. R. Wiseman also concluded magicial trickery and fraud.
I think it is false to discuss the superficial facts from wikepedia. There are almost more intellectual discussion about their phenomena and the problem of fraud in the parapsychological literature. It is always easy to debunk all this by superficial arguments, which are often false.

[Roger Knights]

Hope: I'm pretty sure Darryn was only saying that Eusapia wouldn't have been able to read about Home in a newspaper or magazine, and wasn't "in the swim" with sophisticated circles who would have read about such things and talked about them amongst themselves.

[Michael H]

Yikes, Hope!

I think you might want to read Darryn's post again - I think the point he was making was that the Wiki article is a disaster, and that Eusapia was most likely genuine and that her phenomena shared similarities with Home that she was unlikely to be aware of because she was an illiterate peasant woman. Which she was.

Down, girl, down! :-)

[joki]

Michael H, I agree.

[Michael H]

Thanks, joki, but we'd better brace ourselves. I think Hope's on the warpath today . . .:-)

[Xtina]

Very cool. Many years ago, in some pretty old texts, I had read abaout EP's legitimacy, but in the newer texts, like after the 60's, I've rarely seen her portrayed as anything but a fake. It's good to see this reported here.

[Vitor]

John asked me: So are you saying that you don't believe in Eusapia's mediumship?

My answer: Yes. I think Nina Kulagina is a better example than Eusapia of macro-pk. At least, we have video-tapes.

Michael Prescott asked me:
Including the levitation of the medium and her chair from the floor to the top of the table and down again?

My answer: The problem is that we don't have any photo of this moment. So we can explain this by other natural ways, like allucination, bad memory or other things. There is a famous photo of Mirabelli levitating in a room, but years after this it was discovered that it was only a fraud.

[Hope Rivers]

I've cooled down now Michael :-) sorry I took off so fast, anyway moving forward.

I find Carlos Miribelli a most fascinating subject there's a pic of one of his materialisations online and the other party in the photo had a look of horror on his face as he was looking at the materialised spirit. Seemed very real too me. I think from memory the spirit was some poet.

Victor I haven't heard of Nina Kulagina can you recommend any sites or books on her?

[Michael Prescott]

>we can explain this by other natural ways, like allucination, bad memory or other things.

Since several witnesses were present and were closely observing, it would have to be a collective hallucination that persisted for a fairly extended period of time. I suppose mass hysteria could account for such a thing, but there is no reason to think that these investigators were hysterical.

Bad memory? Typically, researchers in these situations write up their notes immediately after the event. And all of the researchers would have to suffer the same memory lapse.

What I think you're really saying is that the researchers lied. This is the only "natural" explanation that makes any kind of sense. But there is no reason to suspect the researchers of dishonesty. They had nothing to gain by promoting Eusapia; quite the opposite - their endorsement of her abilities hurt their reputations and careers. At least two of them (Lombroso, Richet) were skeptical materialists by training and predisposition, who came to a belief in the paranormal only reluctantly. Lombroso's report reads like a sober record of facts, with Eusapia's occasional failures and attempts at deception plainly noted. Besides, other researchers reported similar phenomena from Eusapia on other occasions, so they must have been lying, too.

I understand skepticism of physical phenomena in the seance room, but when a case is as well observed and carefully reported as this one - with the effects occurring in good light over a period of several minutes - I really don't think any skeptical explanation holds up.

[Alex]

"Lombroso's report reads like a sober record of facts, with Eusapia's occasional failures and attempts at deception plainly noted."

I think it's fruitful to actually include a quote from Lombroso. It doesn't seem like he was a naive researcher:

"Many are the crafty tricks she plays, both in the state of trance (unconsciously) and out of it - for example, freeing one of her two hands, held by the controllers, for the sake of moving objects near her; making touches; slowly lifting the legs of the table by means of one of her knees and one of her feet, and feigning to adjust her hair and then slyly pulling out one hair and putting it over the little balance tray of a letter-weigher in order to lower it. She was seen by Faifofer, before her séances, furtively gathering flowers in a garden, that she might feign them to be 'apports' by availing herself of the shrouding dark of the room."

http://www.survivalafterdeath.org/mediums/palladino.htm

It should be noted that every research group that endorsed her admitted that she would cheat whenever possible.

[Darryn]

I dunno why Hope gets so worked up about my post! Michael H. gets it perfectly :D

I only raised the point because I thought it interesting, not because I regarded it as some spiritually profound thing.

I'm not credulous, but one who is not a dogmatist can't read Feilding's report on the Naples sittings and come away unshaken.

And actually the Wikipedia page is better than I recalled it being. Should have checked it before denouncing. Unless some nice person here is responsible for improving it. It used to be -really- awful.

[Michael H]

I think Hope thought you were being mean by saying EP was an illiterate peasant (which she was), Darryn - No big deal - I think everybody else understood you.

[Vitor]

> Victor I haven't heard of Nina Kulagina can you recommend any sites or books on her?

I prefer to recommend some videos:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V8MOLQP_fpI&mode=related&search=

In scientific journals, search for "Research in Parapsychology" of 1974. There is a good article about Nina. You can get this magazine in Lexcien:

http://www.lexscien.org/lexscien/index.jsp

Oher very good article is this:

H. H. J. Keil; Montague Ullman; Benson Herbert; J. G. Pratt. DIRECTLY OBSERVABLE VOLUNTARY PK EFFECTS: A Survey and Tentative Interpretation of Available Findings from Nina Kulagina and Other Known Related Cases of Recent Date. PSPR Volume 56, 1973-1982, pp. 197-235.

[Hope Rivers]

Thanks Victor, I'll go check it out.

Everyone MH is a mental medium, with a high success rate he guessed my physical stats correctly............amazing stuff ;-)

test him out people's

[Roger Knights]

I activated the URL on Nina recommended by Vitor and got the message, "This video has been removed by the user."

[Vitor]

Roger,

try this link: http://br.youtube.com/watch?v=4jgMzcRxxEE

[Vitor]

Hope,

I put the article online for download here:

http://www.4shared.com/file/39303985/69ae580d/Nina_Kulagina__PSPR_Volume_56.html

[Vitor]

The link is much long! Try this:

http://www.4shared.com/file/39303985/69ae580d

[Vitor]

Prescott,

remember the case of Florence Cook and William Crookes. Crookes eused to say that Florence and Katie King were two different people, but the photos showed exatly the opposite! That's the reason the levitation's episode of Palladino and the chair is NOT a good evidence. We have no photo, and Crooke's episode show the importance of we compare the photos with the transcripts.

Best wishes,
Vitor

[Hope Rivers]

Hey thats great Vitor, downloading right now, thanks :-)

[Hope Rivers]

Wasn't Crookes sleeping with Florence? or was it the materialised one he was in love with???

Both the women looked similar like sisters and I believe Katie was partial to the odd show of skin, I'm sure Crookes was titillated by that, no wonder he hung around so long poor man was obsessed.

I think Florence had the hots for him and used Katie to seduce him, in the event he'd fall for her. Im sure it would be pretty cold and clammy sleeping with Katie but Florence looked like her and he could fantasise about Katie all he wanted when he was with her.

Hey never say never ;-)

[Alex]

"That's the reason the levitation's episode of Palladino and the chair is NOT a good evidence. "

I would read Carrington's book before writing Palladino off. She was studied much more rigorously than Florence Cook:

http://books.google.com/books?hl=en&id=BF_5YsI005UC&dq=palladino+and+her+phenomena&printsec=frontcover&source=web&ots=2HXNNYDw0h&sig=CUe2dzB3IKHxi02cnAYFW5RB9Sk

[Michael Tymn]

It is interesting to note how rumors started by skeptics can be turned into fact by time. I'm referring to the comment above about Crookes' alleged romance with Florence Cook. Actually, I think it was her sister that he was supposedly interested in. I believe the rumor started some years after Crookes' death by someone who knew someone who knew someone who knew the Cook sisters.

As for table levitations, all we have to do is go to the record of D. D. Home's levitations, most of which were in the light. Crookes and Alfred Russel Wallace, two of England's most celebrated scientists were crawling around on the floor trying to figure it out. In one sitting, Crookes' wife was levitated while sitting in her chair. In another sitting, one of the sitters was lifted out of his chair, carried across the table and dropped on the other side of the table. But can we really believe Crookes, a man who would supposedly have an affair with one of the Cook sisters several years later?

[Vitor]

Tymm,

you said:

> In one sitting, Crookes' wife was levitated while sitting in her chair. In another sitting, one of the sitters was lifted out of his chair, carried across the table and dropped on the other side of the table.

My question is: which is the source of these informations?

[Michael Tymn]

For Vitor: Medhurst, R. G. "Crookes and the Spirit World," Taplinger Publishing Company, New York, 1972; Also;
Crookes, Sir William, "Researches Into the Phenomena of Modern Spiritualism," Austin Publishing Co., Los Angeles, 1922

[Hope Rivers]

Michael T often there is truth in rumours.

In relating to my comment I was goofing around with that idea at the time, I winked at the end, it was a joke.

Also thankyou for pointing out that Florence had a sister I was unaware of that it's interesting how my first thought was that they looked like sister's.

But no one knows the extent of Florence and her sister regarding "Katie King". You cant deny the resemblence is incredible

Maybe there's truth in those very first words I used in jest, its not like that hasn't happened to me before.