Spiritualism II. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, The Codex Alexandrinus and Mrs. Spencer
Spiritualism II. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, The Codex Alexandrinus and Mrs. Spencer is an article written by E. J. D. published in The Freethinker on 8 february 1920.
Spiritualism II.
Sir Arthur Conan Doyle, The Codex Alexandrinus and Mrs. Spencer
In my last article I tried to give an illustration of the sort of evidence which is still being produced in order to persuade people to accept the doctrines of Spiritualism. We saw how Slade managed to deceive a few half-blind old men, and how, when confronted by persons having some knowledge of trickery, each step in his adroit manipulations was able to be observed. This week I shall give the readers of the Freethinker some further specimens of arguments and statements recently made by Sir Arthur Conan Doyle in the pages of the public press. The reason I select Sir Arthur is not that I have any personal bias against him, but because he is continually going about the country giving lectures to large audiences in an endeavour to convert them to the spiritualistic hypothesis. I do not know what sort of arguments and examples he makes use of when on tour, but I do know what he says in his books and articles, where one would expect that a man of his reputation would be especially careful to verify every statement that he might feel himself called upon to make.
Firstly, let us glance at what Sir Arthur calls "the supreme moment" of his spiritual experience. At Portsmouth he was present at some seances conducted by a Welsh medium, and it was at one of these sittings that he declares chat he heard the voice of his son speaking to him. He describes it thus:—
- There came a voice in the darkness, a whispered voice, saying, "Jean, it is I." My wife felt a hand upon her head, and cried, "It is Kingsley." I heard the word "Father." I said, "Dear boy, is that you?" I had the sense of a face very near my own, and of breathing. Then the clear voice came again with an intensity and note very distinctive of my son, "Forgive me!" ...... A large strong hand then rested upon my head, it was gently bent forward, and I felt and heard a kiss just above my brow. "Tell me, dear, are you happy?" I cried. There was silence, and I feared he was gone. Then on a sighing note came the words, "Yes, I am so happy."
We have here an absolutely typical example of a "direct voice" manifestation, and there are one or two points in connection with it which are specially remarkable. A whisper in the darkness, a hand placed on Lady Doyle's head, and the conclusion is immediately reached that "it is Kingsley." The voice says "Father," and Sir Arthur asks whether it is his son, and then the voice (which presumably has suddenly become clear) enunciates the phrase, "Forgive me." A hand is then placed upon the head of Sir Arthur, he is kissed, and then in answer to a question comes a sighing voice which says,
"Yes, I am so happy." That is all; yet it is quite sufficient to convince Sir Arthur Conan Doyle that he has met and conversed with the spirit of his son, just as similar experiences have convinced the Rev. Walter Wynn, who is now preaching Spiritualism, instead of assuring us, as he used to do, that the Germans are the direct descendants of the Assyrians, and that Jesus Christ is probably coming to the earth in person before 1934!
I do not know how many of my readers would be convinced of the identity of their loved ones by a dozen half-whispered words in the dark, but we must remember that Spiritualists, like all religious people, are peculiar, and what is certainty to them is very much the reverse to other people. For instance, our distinguished novelist is very interested in spirit photography. In a recent letter to the Daily Express, he explains how a psychograph is perhaps a better word than a photograph, since the former is essentially different, being "rather a transference by abnormal means of something which exists elsewhere." As an example, he says that Professor Henslow in the same way "obtained a reproduction of a page of the Codex Alexandrinus, (1) a document which never left the British Museum."
If this means anything at all, it means that fraud was here impossible, since the source from which the psychograph was derived remained locked up during the whole time that the experiment was made. But Sir Arthur has, unfortunately, forgotten a very material fact, namely, that a facsimile of the codex has been published in four volumes! Another interesting point is that in Prof. Henslow's illustration of the psychograph, as reproduced in his recent book on Spiritualism, it is fairly clear that it is not an exact facsimile at all, but simply a fairly close copy of the original. As this copy could have been made just as easily from the published facsimile as from the MS. itself; what becomes of Sir Arthur's learned statements concerning "a document which never left the British Museum"?
We will now pass on to another specimen of Sir Arthur's attempts to convert us to the marvels and miracles of modern Spiritualism. In the Daily Mail of December 16, 1919, he was waxing eloquent over a wonderful picture by the Hon. Mrs. Victor Spencer. The picture itself was of a head of Jesus, and Sir Arthur went on to say that he thought it was "the finest head of the Founder of Christianity that has ever been conceived," it being painted by a lady who had "no power of artistic expression in her normal condition." This statement, coming from so remarkable a figure in our public life, naturally excited a good deal of interest, and was, as usual, hailed by the Spiritualistic fraternity as another great triumph for their cause. Although, in this case, trance control was not actually specified, it was easy to confuse the position, such paintings being often executed by mediums when supposed to be controlled by a spirit desirous of giving once again his artistic genius some expression upon the canvas. In the present case, Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's description did not quite fit the facts, for it so happened that the Hon. Victor Spencer, husband of the lady artist, wrote to the press explaining the whole story to the great discomfiture of the Spiritualists. Far from having "no power of artistic expression in her normal condition," as stated by Sir Arthur, Mrs. Spencer had been interested in art since her childhood, and, during 1914, had executed some five or six oil paintings, pastels, and drawings. According to her husband, Mrs. Spencer declares that "all her pictures are painted in a perfectly normal manner, and she is disgusted at having psychic power attributed to her."
Such are the facts concerning a lady whose picture of Christ has been trumpeted abroad as a remarkable example of the power of psychic inspiration when applied to painting. The origin of Sir Arthur's story is perfectly clear. Mrs. Spencer's mother-in-law had apparently said during an interview that the picture had been painted upside down (!), and her only explanation of this remarkable feat was that "aid" had been given the painter in producing it. Without consulting the artist, Sir Arthur at once dresses up the story into what we have seen, and it would have doubtless passed as correct for some time had not Mrs. Spencer's husband seen the account, and immediately sent off his crushing exposure to the press. It is from sources like these that the wonderful stories of Spiritualistic marvels are concocted and once pronounced by the high priests of the cult, they become stereotyped articles of faith which it is a waste of time to attempt to shake. One feels almost inclined to say half despairingly: Populus vult decipi : decipiatur.
E. J. D.
(1) One of the earliest and most important MSS. of the Bible in Greek. Sir Arthur says a page was obtained. As a matter of fact, Professor Henslow's photograph shows barely six lines, a page being composed of double columns of about fifty lines each!
