Published online by Cambridge University Press: 17 July 2018
This paper situates Alfred Russel Wallace's spiritualist writings from his book Miracles and Modern Spiritualism (1875) against the backdrop of Victorian anthropology. It examines how he constructed his argument, and the ways in which he verified the trustworthiness of his evidence using theories and methods drawn from anthropology. Spirit investigations relied on personal testimony. Thus the key question was: who could be trusted as a credible witness? While much has been written on Wallace's inquiries into spirit phenomena, very little scholarship has taken seriously his remark about how his studies of spirits and mediums were a “new branch of anthropology.” Wallace's aim of aligning his spirit investigations to the practices of British anthropology fed into larger disciplinary discussions about the construction of reliable anthropological data. Most notably, like many of his Victorian anthropological counterparts, Wallace grounded his research in a double commitment to firsthand observation and Baconian inductivism.
I would like to thank Ian Hesketh, Nathan Uglow, Iwan Morus, Bernie Lightman, Andreas Sommer, Shane McCorristine and Nanna Kaalund for their amazing support while researching and writing this paper. Their insightful commentary was truly invaluable. My thanks also extends to the referees for their critical feedback, and Duncan Kelly for his guidance.
1 Wallace, Alfred Russel, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism: Three Essays (London, 1875), vi–viiGoogle Scholar.
2 Wallace defined modern spiritualism as the practice of the living communicating with the dead through psychic mediums. See Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 80.
4 Alfred Russel Wallace to Thomas Henry Huxley, 22 Nov. 1866, British Library, London, BL Add. 46439 f. 5.
5 Marchant, James, Alfred Russel Wallace Letters and Reminiscences, 2 vols. (London, 1916), 2: 187–8Google Scholar.
7 Oppenheim, Janet, The Other World: Spiritualism and Psychical Research in England, 1850–1914 (Cambridge, 1985), 297Google Scholar.
8 For more on the establishment of credible witnesses in ethnology and anthropology see Sera-Shriar, Efram, “Arctic Observers: Richard King, Monogenism and the Historicization of Inuit through Travel Narratives,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 51 (2015), 23–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sera-Shriar, “Tales from Patagonia: Phillip Parker King and Early Ethnographic Observation in British Ethnology, 1826–1830,” Studies in Travel Writing 19/3 (2015), 204–23.
10 Bleichmar, Daniela, Visible Empire: Botanical Expeditions and Visual Culture in the Hispanic Enlightenment (Chicago, 2012), 6–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more secondary literature on the history of scientific observation within the natural and social sciences see Anne Secord, “Artisan Naturalists: Science as Popular Culture in Nineteenth-Century England” (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, University of London, London, 2002), 135–206; Grasseni, Cristina, ed., Skilled Visions: Between Apprenticeship and Standards (Oxford, 2007)Google Scholar; Grimshaw, Anna, The Ethnographer's Eye: Ways of Seeing in Modern Anthropology (Cambridge, 2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Daston, Lorraine and Galison, Peter, Objectivity (New York, 2007)Google Scholar.
11 As Wallace published his book after the amalgamation of the ESL and ASL, I use the term “anthropology” as an umbrella category to include ethnographic, ethnological and anthropological methods and theories.
12 See, for example, the following works on Wallace's spirit investigations: Keezer, William, “Alfred Russel Wallace: Naturalist, Zoogeographer, Spiritualist, and Evolutionist,” Bios 36/2 (1965), 66–70Google Scholar; Kottler, Malcolm Jay, “Alfred Russel Wallace, the Origin of Man, and Spiritualism,” Isis 65 (1974), 144–92Google ScholarPubMed; Durant, John, “Scientific Naturalism and Social Reform in the Thought of Alfred Russel Wallace,” British Journal for the History of Science 12/2 (1979), 31–58CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Pels, Peter, “Spiritual Facts and Super-Visions: The Conversion of Alfred Russel Wallace,” Religion and Modernity 8/2 (1995), 69–91Google Scholar; Fichman, “Science in Theistic Contexts,” 227–50; and Mitchell, Benjamin David, “Capturing the Will: Imposture, Delusion, and Exposure in Alfred Russel Wallace's Defence of Spirit Photography,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 46 (2014), 15–24CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed. Wallace's spiritualism has also been discussed in the following biographies: Shermer, Michael, In Darwin's Shadow: The Life and Science of Alfred Russel Wallace (Oxford, 2002)Google Scholar; Slotten, Ross, The Heretic in Darwin's Court: The Life of Alfred Russel Wallace (New York, 2004), 326–51Google Scholar; and Fichman, Martin, An Elusive Victorian: The Evolution of Alfred Russel Wallace (Chicago, 2004), 139–208Google Scholar.
13 The best example of a study that investigates Wallace's interest in extra-European forms of spiritualism is Ferguson, Christine, “Other Worlds: Alfred Russel Wallace and Cross-cultural Spiritualism,” Victorian Review 41/2 (2015), 177–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more on the intersection of Wallace, anthropology, travel and spiritualism see Lowrey, Kathleen Bolling, “Alfred Russel Wallace as Ancestor Figure: Reflections on Anthropological Lineage after the Darwin Bicentennial,” Anthropology Today 26 (2010), 18–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
14 Hunt, James discussed the importance of Baconianism in “On Physio-anthropology, Its Aim and Method,” Journal of the Anthropological Society of London 5 (1867), ccix–cclxxiCrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more on Hunt's use of Baconianism in anthropology see Sera-Shriar, Efram, “Observing Human Difference: James Hunt, Thomas Huxley, and Competing Disciplinary Strategies in the 1860s,” Annals of Science 70/4 (2013), 480–85Google Scholar.
16 Evelleen Richards was the first scholar to frame Hunt and Huxley's anthropological feud as a competition between two forms of scientific naturalism, in Richards, Evelleen, “The ‘Moral Anatomy’ of Robert Knox: The Interplay between Biological and Social Thought in Victorian Scientific Naturalism,” Journal of the History of Biology 22/3 (1989), 373–436CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more on the contest for cultural authority in the nineteenth century see Turner, Frank, “The Victorian Conflict between Science and Religion: A Professional Dimension,” Isis 69/3 (1978), 356–76CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Turner, Contesting Cultural Authority: Essays in Victorian Intellectual Life (Cambridge, 1993).
17 For more on the disciplinary debates between British anthropology and ethnology during the 1860s see Stocking, George, “What's in a Name? The Origins of the Royal Anthropological Institute (1837–71),” Man 6/3 (1971), 369–90Google Scholar; Stocking, Victorian Anthropology (New York, 1987), 238–45. Kenny, Robert, “From the Curse of Ham to the Curse of Nature: The Influence of Natural Selection on the Debate on Human Unity before the Publication of the Descent of Man,” British Journal for the History of Science 40/3 (2007), 367–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Kuklick, Henrika, “The British Tradition,” in Kuklick, ed., A New History of Anthropology (Oxford, 2008), 52–78, at 52–6Google Scholar; Sera-Shriar, Efram, The Making of British Anthropology, 1813–1871 (London, 2013), 109–46Google Scholar; and Sera-Shriar, “Human History and Deep Time in Nineteenth-Century British Sciences: An Introduction,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 51 (2015), 19–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
18 Hunt and Huxley outlined the parameters of anthropology and ethnology respectively in the following essays: Hunt, James, “Introductory Address on the Study of Anthropology,” Anthropological Review 1 (1863), 1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Huxley, Thomas Henry, “On the Methods and Results of Ethnology,” Fortnightly Review 1 (1865), 257–77Google Scholar.
20 Hunt, “Introductory Address,” 2.
21 Wallace to Huxley, 22 Nov. 1866.
22 For more on the disciplinary practices of British anthropology in the middle of the nineteenth century see Sera-Shriar, “Observing Human Difference,” 461–91.
23 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 125–6.
24 For more on Spencer Timothy Hall and mesmerism see Winter, Alison, Mesmerized: Powers of Mind in Victorian Britain (Chicago, 2000), 130–36Google Scholar.
25 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 119.
26 Fichman, “Science in Theistic Contexts,” 231.
27 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 125.
28 For Wallace's theory of spiritualism see Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 100–4. In addition to mesmerism, there were other ideas shaping Wallace's views on spiritualism. For example, although he does not engage with the writings of the Swedish theologian, philosopher and mystic Emanuel Swedenborg (1688–1772) in Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, Swedenborgian ideas came to be important for Wallace's later writings on spirits and psychical forces. For more on this connection see Fichman, An Elusive Victorian, 112–17.
29 Weisberg, Barbara, Talking to the Dead: Kate and Maggie Fox and the Rise of Spiritualism (San Francisco, 2004), 12–13Google Scholar.
30 For more on the rise of spiritualism in the nineteenth century see Walkowitz, Judith, “Science and the Séance: Transgressions of Gender and Genre in Late Victorian London,” Representations 22 (1988), 3–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Holloway, Julian, “Enchanted Spaces: The Séance, Affect, and Geographies of Religion,” Annals of the Association of American Geographies 96/1 (2006), 182–7CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Davies, Owen, The Haunted: A Social History of Ghosts (Basingstoke, 2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Bann, Jennifer, “Ghostly Hands and Ghostly Agency: The Changing Figure of the Nineteenth-Century Spectre,” Victorian Studies 51/4 (2009), 663–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar; McCorristine, Shane, Spectre of the Self: Thinking about Ghosts and Ghost-Seeing in England, 1750–1920 (Cambridge, 2010), 12–13CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Nartonis, David, “The Rise of Nineteenth-Century American Spiritualism, 1854–1873,” Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion 49/2 (2010), 361–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Sommer, Andreas, “Psychical Research in the History and Philosophy of Science: An Introduction and Review,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 48 (2014), 38–45CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed.
31 Fichman, “Science in Theistic Contexts,” 231. For more on the link between Wallace's travels, ethnography and spiritualism see Fichman, An Elusive Victorian, 170–71; Lyons, Sherrie Lynne, Species, Serpents, Spirits, and Skulls: Science at the Margins in the Victorian Age (Albany, NY, 2009), 120Google Scholar; Ferguson, “Other Worlds,” 177–91.
32 For example, the geologist and zoologist Robert Jameson's natural-history classes at the University of Edinburgh were designed to prepare young medics and naturalists for careers as scientific travelers, and included in his readings lists, among other things, were important travel narratives. See Desmond, Adrian and Moore, James, Darwin's Sacred Cause: Race, Slavery and the Quest for Human Origins (London, 2009), 28–9Google Scholar.
33 For more on ethnography and observational practices see Sera-Shriar, “Tales from Patagonia,” 206–9.
34 Lyons, Species, Serpents, Spirits, and Skulls, 120.
35 Bravo, Michael, “Ethnological Encounters,” in Jardine, Nicholas, Secord, James and Spary, Emma, eds., Cultures of Natural History (Cambridge, 1996), 338–57Google Scholar, at 344; and Sera-Shriar, “Arctic Observers,” 23–31. For more, generally, on the importance of travel literature in the making of natural sciences see Hulme, Peter and Youngs, Tim, “Introduction,” in Hulme and Youngs, eds., The Cambridge Companion to Travel Writing (Cambridge, 2002), 1–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Browne, Janet, “A Science of Empire: British Biogeography before Darwin,” Revue d'histoire des sciences 45/4 (1992), 453–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Koerner, Lisbet, “Purposes of Linnaean Travel: A Preliminary Research Report,” in Miller, David Phillip and Reill, Peter Hanns, eds., Visions of Empire: Voyages, Botany, and Representation in Nature (Cambridge, 1996), 117–52Google Scholar; Carey, Daniel, “Compiling Nature's History: Travellers and Travel Narratives in the Early Royal Society,” Annals of Science 54/3 (1997), 269–92CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Nanna Kaalund, “From Science in the Arctic to Arctic Science: A Transnational Study of Arctic Travel Narratives, 1818–1883” (unpublished Ph.D. thesis, York University, Toronto, 2017).
36 For more on true-to-nature objectivity see Daston and Galison, Objectivity, 55–113.
37 For more on Humboldtian science see Cannon, Susan Faye, Science in Culture: The Early Victorian Period (New York, 1978)Google Scholar; Pratt, Mary Louise, Imperial Eyes: Travel Writing and Transculturation (London, 1992), 111–44Google Scholar; Carey, “Compiling Nature's History,” 269–92; Dettelbach, Michael, “The Face of Nature: Precise Measurement, Mapping, and Sensibility in the Work of Alexander von Humboldt,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 30 (1999), 473–504CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Wulf, Andrea, The Invention of Nature: Alexander von Humboldt's New World (New York, 2015)Google Scholar.
38 Durant, John, “Scientific Naturalism and Social Reform in the Thought of Alfred Russel Wallace,” British Journal for the History of Science 12 (1979), 31–58, at 39CrossRefGoogle Scholar. For more on Prichard and Lawrence as seminal figures of British ethnology see Sera-Shriar, The Making of British Anthropology, 21–52. Prichard and Lawrence's seminal works in ethnology were Prichard, James Cowles, Researches into the Physical History of Man (London, 1813)Google Scholar; and Lawrence, William, Lectures on Physiology, Zoology, and the Natural History of Man, Delivered at the Royal College of Surgeons (Salem, 1828)Google Scholar.
39 Durant, “Scientific Naturalism and Social Reform,” 40; Vetter, “The Unmaking of an Anthropologist,” 25–42; and Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 148–9.
40 Wallace's original three essays appeared as follows: Wallace, Alfred Russel, The Scientific Aspect of the Supernatural: Indicating the Desirableness of an Experimental Enquiry by Men of Science into the Alleged Powers of Clairvoyants and Mediums (London, 1866)Google Scholar; Wallace, “An Answer to the Arguments of Hume, Lecky, and Others, against Miracles,” The Spiritualist: A Record of the Progress of the Science and Ethics of Spiritualism 1 (1870), 113–16Google Scholar; Wallace, “A Defence of Modern Spiritualism,” Fortnightly Review 15 (1874), 630–57Google Scholar; Wallace, “A Defence of Modern Spiritualism: Part II,” Fortnightly Review 15 (1874), 785–807Google Scholar.
41 For more on reliable evidence in spiritualism see Noakes, Richard, “Haunted Thoughts of the Careful Experimentalist: Psychical Research and the Troubles of Experimental Physics,” Studies in History and Philosophy of Biological and Biomedical Sciences 48 (2014), 46–56CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed; Lamont, “Spiritualism,” 897–920.
42 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 100.
44 Oppenheim, The Other World, 307; and Fichman, An Elusive Victorian, 141.
45 For more on scientific naturalism see Macleod, Roy, “The X Club: A Social Network of Science in Late-Victorian England,” Notes and Records of the Royal Society of London 24 (1970), 305–22Google ScholarPubMed; Turner, “The Victorian Conflict,” 356–76; Barton, Ruth, “Huxley, Lubbock, and Half a Dozen Others,” Isis 89/3 (1998), 410–44CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Desmond, Adrian, “Redefining the X Axis: ‘Professionals’,’ ‘Amateurs’ and the Making of Mid-Victorian Biology—A Progress Report,” Journal of the History of Biology 34/1 (2001), 3–50CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Dawson, Gowan and Lightman, Bernard, eds., Victorian Scientific Naturalism: Community, Identity and Continuity (Chicago, 2014)Google Scholar.
46 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 100.
48 For more on evolutionism in Victorian ethnology and anthropology see Stocking, George, ed., Race, Culture, and Evolution: Essays in the History of Anthropology (Chicago, 1968)Google Scholar; Stocking, “‘Cultural Darwinism’ and ‘Philosophical Idealism’ in E. B. Tylor,” in ibid., 91–109; Leopold, Joan, Culture in Comparative and Evolutionary Perspective: E. B. Tylor and the Making of Primitive Culture (Berlin, 1980)Google Scholar; Sera-Shriar, “Observing Human Difference,” 468–9; Kuklick, Henrika, “The Theory of Evolution and Cultural Anthropology,” in Fasolo, Aldo, ed., The Theory of Evolution and Its Impact (Berlin, 2012), 83–102CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Sera-Shriar, “Race,” 48–76.
50 Although Wallace frames his evolutionary paradigm as Darwinian, his theistic tendencies were incommensurable with Darwin's inherent positivism and Humean predilection. For more on Wallace's evolutionism see Flannery, Michael, “Alfred Russel Wallace, Nature's Prophet: From Natural Selection to Natural Theology,” in Das, Indraneil and Tuen, Andrew Alex, eds., Naturalists, Explorers and Field Scientists in South Asia and Australia (Dordrecht, 2016), 51–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar; and Fichman, An Elusive Victorian. For more on Darwin, positivism and Humean philosophy see Gillespie, Neal C., Charles Darwin and the Problem of Creation (Chicago, 1979)Google Scholar; and Brown, Frank Burch, “The Evolution of Darwin's Theism,” Journal of the History of Biology 19/1 (1986), 1–45Google Scholar.
51 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 109.
53 Fichman, “Science in Theistic Contexts,” 228. See also Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 116.
54 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 115–16.
55 For more on Hunt and the Anthropological Society of London see Burrow, J. W., “Evolution and Anthropology in the 1860’s: The Anthropological Society of London, 1863–71,” Victorian Studies 7/2 (1963), 137–49Google Scholar; Stocking, “What's in a Name?”, 369–90; Stocking, Victorian Anthropology, 247–55; Spencer, Frank, “Hunt, James (1833–1869)”, in Spencer, ed., History of Physical Anthropology, 2 vols. (London, 1997), 1: 506–8Google Scholar; Kenny, “From the Curse of Ham to the Curse of Nature,” 367–88; Kuklick, “The British Tradition,” 52–5; and Sera-Shriar, “Observing Human Difference,” 461–91.
56 For more on Baconianism and disciplinary formation in nineteenth-century Britain see Rudwick, Martin, The Great Devonian Controversy: The Shaping of Scientific Knowledge among Gentlemanly Specialists (Chicago, 1985), 24–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar; Porter, Roy, The Making of Geology: Earth Science in Britain 1660–1815 (Cambridge, 1977), 66–70Google Scholar; and Yeo, Richard, “Scientific Method and the Rhetoric of Science in Britain 1830–1917,” in Schuster, John and Yeo, Richard, eds., The Politics and Rhetoric of Scientific Method (Dordrecht, 1986), 259–97CrossRefGoogle Scholar.
57 Gruber, Howard, Darwin on Man: A Psychological Study of Scientific Creativity (Chicago, 1974), 122Google Scholar.
58 James Hunt, “On Physio-anthropology,” ccxii.
59 For more on the race taxonomies of Prichard and Lawrence see Prichard, Researches, 7, 21–5; Lawrence, Natural History of Man, 107, 242–52. See also Sera-Shriar, The Making of British Anthropology, 27–42.
60 Tylor, Edward Burnett, Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art and Custom, 2 vols. (London, 1871), 1: viGoogle Scholar. See also Sera-Shriar, The Making of British Anthropology, 163–4.
61 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 47.
62 Bleichmar, Visible Empire, 6–10.
63 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 32.
66 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 199–200.
70 The use of travel narratives to substantiate ethnological and anthropological research was widespread within the two disciplines and is sprinkled throughout the works of nineteenth-century researchers. For example, see Prichard, Researches; Lawrence, Natural History of Man; Latham, Robert Gordon, The Natural History of the Varieties of Man (London, 1850)Google Scholar; Hunt, James, On the Negro's Place in Nature (London, 1863)Google Scholar; Tylor, Primitive Culture.
71 Vetter, “The Unmaking of an Anthropologist,” 25–42; Durant, “Scientific Naturalism and Social Reform,” 31–58.
72 Daston and Galison, Objectivity, 19–27. See also Bleichmar's discussion on long-distance observation in Blechmar, Visible Empire, 66–72.
73 For more on observation and ethnography see Janet Browne, “Biogeography and Empire,” in Jardine, Secord and Spary, Cultures of Natural History, 305–21, at 306–8; Bravo, “Ethnological Encounters,” 338–57; Sera-Shriar, “Tales from Patagonia,” 206–9; Sera-Shriar, “Arctic Observers,” 23–31.
74 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 145.
75 For more on how armchair ethnologists made sense of others’ firsthand observations see Sera-Shriar, The Making of British Anthropology, 75.
76 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 47–8.
78 Much has been written on Kate Fox and her sisters. For example, see Davenport, Reuben Briggs, The Death-Blow to Spiritualism: Being the True Story of the Fox Sisters, as Revealed by Authority of Margaret Fox Kane and Catherine Fox Jencken (New York, 1888)Google Scholar; Oppenheim, The Other World, 11, 32, 35, 126, 297, 331, 344; Weisberg, Talking to the Dead; Chaplin, David, Exploring Other Worlds: Margaret Fox, Elisha Kent Kane, and the Antebellum Culture of Curiosity (Amherst, 2004)Google Scholar; McCorristine, Spectres of the Self, 12, 60.
79 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 156. It is worth noting, however, that in 1888 Margaret Fox publicly admitted to committing fraud with her sisters during performances.
80 For more on Owen and spiritualism see Lehman, Amy, Victorian Women and the Theatre of Trance: Mediums, Spiritualists and Mesmerists in Performance (London, 2002), 160–68Google Scholar.
82 For more on Chambers and spiritualism see Oppenheim, The Other World, 272–8.
83 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 156.
84 For more on Faraday's experiments see Faraday, Michael, “Experimental Investigation of Table-Turning,” Journal of the Franklin Institute 56 (1853), 328–33CrossRefGoogle Scholar; anonymous, “Michael Faraday's Researches in Spiritualism,” Scientific Monthly 83 (1956), 145–50; and Oppenheim, The Other World, 327–8, 336–7.
85 The most comprehensive study of Home's career is Lamont, Peter, The First Psychic: The Extraordinary Mystery of a Notorious Victorian Wizard (Preston, 2005)Google Scholar.
86 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 158–9. The original source of these observations is Brewster's daughter's biography of her father: Gordon, Margaret Maria, The Home Life of Sir David Brewster (Edinburgh, 1869), 257–8Google Scholar.
87 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, pp. 158–9.
91 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 163.
92 Shapin, Steven and Schaffer, Simon, Leviathan and the Air-Pump: Hobbes, Boyle, and the Experimental Life (Princeton, 1985), 60–65Google Scholar.
93 Wallace, Miracles and Modern Spiritualism, 126.
95 Tylor, Primitive Culture, 1: 384–5.
96 Wallace to Huxley, 22 Nov. 1866.
97 Wallace, Alfred Russel, “Primitive Culture: Researches into the Development of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art, and Custom,” The Academy 3 (1872), 69–71Google Scholar.
99 It is worth noting that, by 1892, Wallace no longer viewed spiritualism as supernatural, and regretted having formed this link in his 1866 essay. See Wallace, Alfred Russel, “Spiritualism,” in Patrick, David, ed., Chamber's Encyclopedia, 10 vols. (Edinburgh, 1892), 9: 645–9Google Scholar.
100 For more on the formation of the Society for Psychical Research see Bennett, Edward, The Society for Psychical Research: Its Rise & Progress & A Sketch of Its Work (London, 1903)Google Scholar; Salter, William Henry, The Society for Psychical Research: An Outline of Its History (London, 1948)Google Scholar; Gauld, Alan, The Founders of Psychical Research (London, 1968)Google Scholar; Haynes, Renee, The Society for Psychical Research 1882–1982 (London, 1982)Google Scholar; Oppenheim, The Other World, 142–58, 253–62, 361–5; and Luckhurst, Roger, The Invention of Telepathy (Oxford, 2002), 51–9, 148–50Google Scholar.