The decision to publish these writings was formed after much careful weighing of all reasons for and against, and their issue at the present juncture was largely influenced by the feeling that public interest in such matters had greatly ripened since the war, and that the fruits of the author's experiment should not be withheld, since they might serve to direct that interest into a new and perhaps profitable channel.
The script produced during the fairly long period of time (from the end of 1907 to 1911, and again in 1912 and more recently) was obtained under varying conditions, and was of very varied quality. A large proportion had reference to Glastonbury and to monastic affairs and history, and of this only a part would claim to possess any sort of evidential value. Some was of private interest only, and would be useless for publication. Occasionally the attempted communication was a failure. In a few cases there were noted some very obvious misstatements. The most serious of these was in the measures first given for the Edgar Chapel, "Et Capella extensit 30 virgas ad orientem et viginti virgas in latitudine(m)." A "virga" is a yard. The script was very obscure, and the measure was asked for again, with the result that "quinquaginta virgas" was written. A third time the confirmation was sought, and this time the "30 virgas" was repeated. "Quinquaginta" (50) was obviously a mistake, but the repetition of the 30 virgas, though indicating a length vastly in excess of anything we had ever thought possible for this chapel, made one less inclined to dismiss it without further attention. The "viginti virgas" given once for the width seemed quite out of the question. And as the event proved, no measure approaching 20 yards for the extreme width of the chapel could then be shown to have existed. It appeared absurd, and was then and there ruled out, together with the inconsistent and excessive "quinquaginta virgas" of length.7 This occurred at the close of the first sitting, which had been a long one. The writing was becoming less clear; the power was failing, and the sitters beginning to feel weary.
No further attempt was therefore made at the time to elucidate the measures, but it was resolved to try again on a subsequent occasion. There was a very cold spell in the early winter of 1907-8, and the attempts during this period were mostly failures. On the 13th December the sitting was abandoned for this reason. Another on the 21st produced nothing satisfactory. Again, on the 3rd January, 1908, when the cold was at its height, only a few cramped and uncertain words could be obtained, in which these were traced:
"Frigidus sum ... memoria oportet nullum ... nescio quid aut quo8 fecimus scriptum...."
Another and much more important cause of failure must now be noted. About the beginning of 1908 certain circumstances of a rather anxious and trying nature were affecting one of the sitters. This produced a preoccupation of mind unfavourable to the production of automatic writing; and it seems a well-established rule that the sitters' minds must be placid and their mood quiescent to obtain the best results. On the 30th January, 1908, a further attempt was made to obtain writing, but with entire lack of success from this cause, and all that was worth recording was a few words, ending with the following: "Eschew self. Something clogs the tones. Search yourselves straitly."
It was not until the 19th of February that any further really satisfactory results were attained, and at this sitting the unspoken desire of the sitters was met and a detailed description of the Edgar Chapel given, including its outside measure of width—namely, 34 feet. But it was not until Sitting XXXII. on the 16th June that the final confirmation came. This was in answer to a question, and it was given as follows:
"The width ye shall find is twenty and seven, and outside, thirty and four, so we remember.—BEERE ABBAS."
At the date of this sitting, the west wall of the chapel had been located, but its length not yet ascertained, so that there was nothing to guide opinion as to this save what could be inferred from the position of the small section opened, which showed it to be probably about 20 feet in the clear of the footings, if placed centrally with the quire. Then, in response to the further question, What was the clear internal length of the chapel? came the reply,
"Wee laid downe seventy and two, but they builded longer."
And the veridical nature of these figures was shown by later knowledge. (See Table, p. 76.)
But to return to the subject of errors. At Sitting XXXVI., on the 19th September, 1908, there was given the story of a Saxon Earl, one Eawulf, or Eanwulf, who was slain by a certain Radulphus, Norman knight of the time of Turstin, first Norman Abbot. The story is quite a good one and contains what appears to be veridical matter, but it is marred by a peculiarity. Halfway through the script a strange mistake is noted. The name of Turstin is substituted for Radulphus, and the script says, "Eawulf and Turstinus did fight, and the Norman did slay the Saxon." Now such an error is tiresome, as it spoils the clearness of the story. Yet, in another way, it is interesting, for the light that it throws on the mechanical action of the brain as the probable source of error in automatic writing or speaking.
It is a fact well known to those who are called upon to speak in public, or who are engaged in literary work, that unless the attention be fixed and concentrated on the subject in hand, the brain will act mechanically, causing repetition of any word recently impressed on the mental tympanum, and such word may easily be substituted for another. Where there is fatigue, this may happen very easily. In the case of automatic writing, the mind is relaxed, and there is probably a predisposition to such errors. The example given seems a proof of it. It seems, indeed, a matter for surprise that such mistakes are not more numerous in the script obtained by us. On the contrary, another phenomenon has been frequently observed in connection with it. This is, that at the commencement of a sitting the thread of a former communication, broken by the termination of a previous séance, would be resumed almost as though no interval of time had elapsed.
It had been intended in the present work that only the veridical matter concerning the Edgar Chapel should appear in print; but the scope was enlarged by the inclusion of Johannes, whose personality seemed attractive. Later, it was decided to allow the remarkable reminiscence of the "Loretto" Chapel also to see the light of day, in anticipation of further knowledge. But readers will understand that nothing like a wholesale reproduction of the script in the author's possession would be possible. At the same time it may be clearly stated that in what is reserved there is nothing which contradicts or negatives the value of what is given, and of this the fact that the author has been able with success to follow out the indications given may be held sufficient warrant.
No apology seems needed for the quality of the "Latin" in the script, which is very much what one might imagine to be the colloquial jargon of illiterate members of the community, whose knowledge of the tongue would be chiefly confined to the service-books, or what they understood of them.
The author would here record his indebtedness to his friend J.A., not only for that cordial interest and co-operation without which the new line of research could not have been undertaken, nor this work have seen the light of day; but also for the verses he has written on the subject of Plate III., and on the final Envoi. His thanks are also due to Miss A. M. Buckton for her sonnet (Plate I.) and for many valued suggestions; to Mr. T. H. Felton for his permission to use material from the Cannon MS.; to the Council of the Somerset Archæological Society for loan of several blocks (including Plate II.); and to Mr. Edward Everard for the loan of Coney's and Stukeley's plates; also to Mr. Everard Feilding for his constant interest in the work and many helpful suggestions.