Research source

In this last case the dress of the figure does not seem to have been seen distinctly

Date of account: Published 1894
Source: Apparitions and thought-transference: an examination of the evidence for telepathy
Reference: Apparitions and thought-transference: an examination of the evidence for telepathy · selected passage 161
Rights: public_domain
Language: English
Record updated: 2026-08-24

Record summary

Published source text

Read the available text below. Archive transcriptions may contain OCR errors; later context is labelled separately. A recorded claim is not a finding that it happened.

Source passage

Source text · mention only

In this last case the dress of the figure does not seem to have been seen distinctly. But in the apparition of the 16th November, it will be observed that the dress was that ordinarily worn in the daytime by Mr. Godfrey, and that in which the percipient would be accustomed to see him, _not_ the dress which he was actually wearing at the time. If the apparition is in truth nothing more than an expression of the percipient's thought this is what we should expect to find, and as a matter of fact in the majority of well evidenced narratives of telepathic hallucination this is what we actually do find. The dress and surroundings of the phantasm represent, not the dress and surroundings of the agent at the moment, but those with which the percipient is familiar. If other proof were wanting, this fact would in itself seem a sufficient argument that we have to deal, not with ghosts but with hallucinations. It is to be regretted, however, that most recent experimenters in this direction have succeeded only in producing apparitions of themselves. But a crucial experiment of the kind desired is to be found in an account published in 1822 by H. M. Wesermann, Government Assessor and Chief Inspector of Roads at Düsseldorf.

Historical context

Contextual commentary · mention only

This comes from historical psychical research. Methods, witness handling and standards of evidence differ from present-day research and should be assessed from the cited passage and edition.

Modern context

Contextual commentary · mention only

The passage can support a history of claims and recurring descriptions. It does not establish a paranormal mechanism, and competing psychological, social and physical explanations remain relevant.

Investigate related details with Anomaly Graph’s account-based search, or read how matching and provenance work.