• We have updated the guidelines regarding posting political content: please see the stickied thread on Website Issues.

Ghost Evolution

"Comparative ghost study" is indeed a good idea.

Regarding France, I am French and I can tell you there are plenty of ghost stories, but it is true that the phenomenon is not as popular as in the British Isles. As BS3 pointed out in a previous post, there may be historical explanations for that.

I suspect that in France, the philosophy of the "enlightened" thinkers of the 17th and 18th century (Descartes, Voltaire, Rousseau and Diderot) and the French revolution contributed to the French lack of passion for ghostly tales. Descartes for instance was a rationalist. Voltaire probably thought himself as enlightened too, and used to mock whatever he found superstitious. During the times of the last French kings, those who wanted to be popular at the court had to display their intelligence and despise for traditional thinking. Of course, there were also people who searched for fantasy in occultism, kabbala, and so on, but overall, the general mood seem to have been bent towards rationalism.

It got worse after the revolution, because the Republican State went into open conflict with the Catholic Church. As with many other and later revolutions, it spurred a great drive to clean out what were considered as remnants of a corrupted past. Traditional religion was replaced by a "civic religion" worshipping a nameless "Supreme Being". Every month of the year got renamed according to the cycle of nature (for instance, the month when grain germinated was called "Germinal"). And of course, lots of aristocrats and rich people had to flee the country for political reasons. Their properties (and along, the history of these properties) were sold and their furnitures scattered. So it was really a kind of great "reset". By essence, ghosts are "traditional" : they fit into a local history, as their tales are told from father to son, neighbour to neighbour. So I suspect that, in spite of all its violence, the French Revolution did send many ghostly tales into oblivion. And in any case, with the revolutionary and napoleonic wars raging, the French did not have time to waste with ghosts. It was simply not compatible with the mood of the 19th century.

The impacts of the revolution decreased as time passed, but a kind of proud rationalism kept striving in France. At the end of the 19th century / beginning of the 20th, the 3rd Republic was intent on forming generations of loyal republican citizens. Through Jules Ferry's reforms, a generation of young republicans was formed. The idea was not so much to prevent them believing in ghosts but to defeat militant catholicism, which was suspected of favouring the monarchy. There was also a very strong drive towards abolishing regional differences. Whether you came from Brittany or Southern France, you had to abandon your native language and speak only in French. Those who didn't comply would be beaten. Besides, something like one sixth of the population was uprooted and came to live in just one central city : Paris. This did not favour the perpetuation of local traditions about ghosts. All the more so when a whole generation of those people who had stayed in rural areas got slaughtered by the million in WW1.

All in all : scientific positivism, an uprooted society, a scattered heritage and so on, did not favour the popularity of ghost stories ... Of course, locally, or within the familial circle, you would still tell ghost stories, but it would generally not be a fashionable topic for socializing.

As a French, I do admire how, in spite of its own bloody revolutions, Great Britain has managed to lovingly protect her cultural heritage. When you visit a castle in England or Scotland, you immediately see the difference with France : in a way, British castles or old stately homes, are still full of life. They preserve an amazing quantity of their original furniture, which tells a lot about the history of their successive owners. I think this creates a far more favourable climate for hauntings. France may have the huge and hollow palace of Versailles, but it doesn't possess such a background, and it probably makes a great difference.

I don't know about lovingly protecting it; I love history and 'heritage', but look at the economic relationships behind most of it and our affection feels a bit more like Stockholm Syndrome sometimes.

Britain is in the unusual situation of having had a very early 'revolution' that left the main elements of the patrician or landowning class essentially intact...and indeed still having an impact on its political landscape down to the current time. Right through the Age of Revolutions, the wars of the 20th century, and so on. And then of course you've got our idiosyncratic church, which was bound irrevocably to the same power structure since the time of Henry VIII.

I think it's not coincidental that so many of our ghost stories centre on Big Houses and landowning families.
 
When were they last seen, though?
I've got an iron age horseman seen within the last decade or so in one of my books - can't remember off the top of my head which one it was - will have to go searching! (I've a sneaky suspicion its in the one I'm currently writing.... but when you're already over 100,000 words in and you're my age, memory is against you!) :p
 
I've got an iron age horseman seen within the last decade or so in one of my books - can't remember off the top of my head which one it was - will have to go searching! (I've a sneaky suspicion its in the one I'm currently writing.... but when you're already over 100,000 words in and you're my age, memory is against you!) :p
I think we had a discussion on here at one point about identifying the era of horsemen - I asked if witnesses could identify whether or not a horse sounded as though it had been shod (there is a lot of difference between the sound of unshod hooves and those wearing metal shoes, particularly on a hard surfaced road). I think it might have been where I was relating the time that I was mistaken for a ghostly horseman, riding past people in fog so thick that they could hear me but not see me.
 
I think we had a discussion on here at one point about identifying the era of horsemen - I asked if witnesses could identify whether or not a horse sounded as though it had been shod (there is a lot of difference between the sound of unshod hooves and those wearing metal shoes, particularly on a hard surfaced road). I think it might have been where I was relating the time that I was mistaken for a ghostly horseman, riding past people in fog so thick that they could hear me but not see me.
That reminds me of my Mum who told me that sometimes the fog was so heavy when she was in England, that she couldn't see down her own lane. So she would have to hang on to the fences as she walked down the road, until she recognized her own fence.
I've never seen that here in the USA.
 
That reminds me of my Mum who told me that sometimes the fog was so heavy when she was in England, that she couldn't see down her own lane. So she would have to hang on to the fences as she walked down the road, until she recognized her own fence.
I've never seen that here in the USA.
Was it fog or smog? We do get thick fog but in the 50s and 60s in London smog was frequent and a killer being a mix of fog and pollution, mainly smoke from coal fires. Estimated to have killed 12,000 in London in 1962. They were known as pea soupers.

I remember breathing through a white handkerchief which left a yellow brown stain on the fabric after a few breaths. Also, like your Mum, feeling my way home from school using front garden walls and watching the cars crawling past on dipped headlights.

But kids now just want to breathe air - where's the fun in that? You can see where you're going, there's no tantalising tang of hydrocarbons, no stinging eyes, no yellow brown residue on your skin and clothes.:omr:

Edited to add. Fog/smog could be very spooky, I knew a few kids who really hated it for that reason rather than the whole health aspect.
 
... different in Scotland! :twothumbs:

Yes, well the Crown quickly learned not to poke any more sticks into that particular (Calvinist) bees' nest.

It's surprising how much British political history hinges on Scots preferences in religious administration. I wonder if anyone has ever studied how Scottish ghost stories differ from English ones?
 
"Comparative ghost study" is indeed a good idea.

Regarding France, I am French and I can tell you there are plenty of ghost stories, but it is true that the phenomenon is not as popular as in the British Isles. As BS3 pointed out in a previous post, there may be historical explanations for that.

I suspect that in France, the philosophy of the "enlightened" thinkers of the 17th and 18th century (Descartes, Voltaire, Rousseau and Diderot) and the French revolution contributed to the French lack of passion for ghostly tales. Descartes for instance was a rationalist. Voltaire probably thought himself as enlightened too, and used to mock whatever he found superstitious. During the times of the last French kings, those who wanted to be popular at the court had to display their intelligence and despise for traditional thinking. Of course, there were also people who searched for fantasy in occultism, kabbala, and so on, but overall, the general mood seem to have been bent towards rationalism.

It got worse after the revolution, because the Republican State went into open conflict with the Catholic Church. As with many other and later revolutions, it spurred a great drive to clean out what were considered as remnants of a corrupted past. Traditional religion was replaced by a "civic religion" worshipping a nameless "Supreme Being". Every month of the year got renamed according to the cycle of nature (for instance, the month when grain germinated was called "Germinal"). And of course, lots of aristocrats and rich people had to flee the country for political reasons. Their properties (and along, the history of these properties) were sold and their furnitures scattered. So it was really a kind of great "reset". By essence, ghosts are "traditional" : they fit into a local history, as their tales are told from father to son, neighbour to neighbour. So I suspect that, in spite of all its violence, the French Revolution did send many ghostly tales into oblivion. And in any case, with the revolutionary and napoleonic wars raging, the French did not have time to waste with ghosts. It was simply not compatible with the mood of the 19th century.

The impacts of the revolution decreased as time passed, but a kind of proud rationalism kept striving in France. At the end of the 19th century / beginning of the 20th, the 3rd Republic was intent on forming generations of loyal republican citizens. Through Jules Ferry's reforms, a generation of young republicans was formed. The idea was not so much to prevent them believing in ghosts but to defeat militant catholicism, which was suspected of favouring the monarchy. There was also a very strong drive towards abolishing regional differences. Whether you came from Brittany or Southern France, you had to abandon your native language and speak only in French. Those who didn't comply would be beaten. Besides, something like one sixth of the population was uprooted and came to live in just one central city : Paris. This did not favour the perpetuation of local traditions about ghosts. All the more so when a whole generation of those people who had stayed in rural areas got slaughtered by the million in WW1.

All in all : scientific positivism, an uprooted society, a scattered heritage and so on, did not favour the popularity of ghost stories ... Of course, locally, or within the familial circle, you would still tell ghost stories, but it would generally not be a fashionable topic for socializing.

As a French, I do admire how, in spite of its own bloody revolutions, Great Britain has managed to lovingly protect her cultural heritage. When you visit a castle in England or Scotland, you immediately see the difference with France : in a way, British castles or old stately homes, are still full of life. They preserve an amazing quantity of their original furniture, which tells a lot about the history of their successive owners. I think this creates a far more favourable climate for hauntings. France may have the huge and hollow palace of Versailles, but it doesn't possess such a background, and it probably makes a great difference.

I think it depends on the départements français.
I reckon that most French urbanites would scoff at English ghost stories, but my wife is from rural Mayenne, that has quite a surfeit of hauntings.

How about la Dame Verte de château du Rocher à Mézangers?

https://www.francebleu.fr/infos/insolite/un-chateau-hante-par-une-dame-verte-en-mayenne-1572461698

or le fantôme de la dame blanche at the Château de Bourgon-Montourtier?

https://www.ouest-france.fr/pays-de...me-de-la-dame-blanche-hante-la-maison-4347586

A previous post mentioned thick fog. The most impenetrable fog I have ever experienced was also in Mayenne, when driving from my then girlfriend's house in Moulay to her sister's place for dinner in the village of Saint-Jean-Sur-Mayenne.
It was only around 24 km, but the outrageously thick fog limited my speed so that it took me around an hour to get there.
 
Was it fog or smog? We do get thick fog but in the 50s and 60s in London smog was frequent and a killer being a mix of fog and pollution, mainly smoke from coal fires. Estimated to have killed 12,000 in London in 1962. They were known as pea soupers.

I remember breathing through a white handkerchief which left a yellow brown stain on the fabric after a few breaths. Also, like your Mum, feeling my way home from school using front garden walls and watching the cars crawling past on dipped headlights.

But kids now just want to breathe air - where's the fun in that? You can see where you're going, there's no tantalising tang of hydrocarbons, no stinging eyes, no yellow brown residue on your skin and clothes.:omr:

Edited to add. Fog/smog could be very spooky, I knew a few kids who really hated it for that reason rather than the whole health aspect.
LOL - Yes, she called it 'pea soupers', and she said it was spooky! She was in Beaconsfield.
 
I've been that lost in Beaconsfield, but it was caused by drinking nine halves of Owd Roger at the Royal Standard.
LOL! My Grandmother lived on Chesterton Green, we lived on Upper Riding, when I look at them now on Google, they look lovely.
 
LOL! My Grandmother lived on Chesterton Green, we lived on Upper Riding, when I look at them now on Google, they look lovely.
Used to meet with pals at the Curzon center (Youth Hostelling group) and then drink in the pub where 'revolutions' is now (some years ago obvs).
 
LOL - Yes, she called it 'pea soupers', and she said it was spooky! She was in Beaconsfield.
Thick fog can also be very disconcerting out in the sticks. I remember one drive home on a November night, where, if I hadn't lived up a hill on a straight road, thus making it almost impossible to miss my house, I would have been lost. A drive that normally takes about five minutes took fifteen. I think the lack of landmarks (even though I've lived here nearly thirty years and don't think I need them, my brain must subconciously be noting where I am all the time) gave it an unearthly and 'going on forever' feel.
 
Thick fog can also be very disconcerting out in the sticks. I remember one drive home on a November night, where, if I hadn't lived up a hill on a straight road, thus making it almost impossible to miss my house, I would have been lost. A drive that normally takes about five minutes took fifteen. I think the lack of landmarks (even though I've lived here nearly thirty years and don't think I need them, my brain must subconciously be noting where I am all the time) gave it an unearthly and 'going on forever' feel.
You're right there. I'll never forget crossing a field I know very well in very thick fog, as I got further into the field, the hedgerow behind was lost in the murk, and all of the other field boundaries were off in the fog somewhere. I became disoriented very quickly (unusual for me) and could not tell where I was going or where I had come from. I had to keep heading in one direction until I hit a hedgerow, then follow it around the edge of the field to the stile I was looking for. Quite disconcerting indeed.
 
All this talk of fog has reminded me of a post I made over 5 years ago:

You just gave me a flashback to a slightly eerie experience I had around 20 years ago.
There was extremely thick fog in Hampshire that evening and I had walked up to my local pub (around half a mile up hill) for a beer. On heading back down the hill an hour later with a couple of pints inside me, I noticed that the fog had thickened and was amongst the worst I had ever seen. I was walking down the pavement on the left of the road and could not see the other side of the road through the fog. I think the Moon was almost full, which gave the fog a weird luminescence and impenetrability.
What I did see though was a strange dark figure, maybe 2-3 feet high, slowly plodding down the middle of the road, a short distance in front of me.
My pulse quickened as I wondered what the gnome-like apparition could possibly be. I was, however, determined to find out, so quickened my pace towards the shadow-like entity.

And I saw.....


.... a particularly large Canada Goose, sadly disoriented by the thick fog.
As I approached, it hissed and flapped its way over to the far side of the road.
Given the aggressive reputation and rather nasty pseudo-teeth of these latter-day dinosaurs, I gave it a wide berth and continued on home.
 
I think it depends on the départements français.
I reckon that most French urbanites would scoff at English ghost stories, but my wife is from rural Mayenne, that has quite a surfeit of hauntings.

Of course ! Rural areas have kept comparatively more ghost stories than urban areas, especially in the West. Some claim that it's because of the weather (fog again ! lol !) but I think it's more a matter of context and regional identity. Or rather : of "uprooting".

For instance, the areas of Western France, from Vendée to Brittany and parts of Normandy kept strong regional identities througout recent history.

Vendée and Brittany were also hotbeds of royalisms and traditional catholicism during the French Revolution. The colleague standing next to me just as I write this words considers himself a Breton, even though he was born and spent his entire life in Paris. So there is really some kind of visceral attachment to one's regional roots there, and it goes along with perpetuating local traditions and stories. Actually, among the first French writers who undertook the task of collecting ghost stories, we find a lot of folklorists, whose purpose was to preserve local identity. In Brittany, Anatole Le Braz is famous for that [this "identitarian" mechanism may have played a role as well in other countries & areas : Scotland ? Germany ?]

My own ancestors, from my mother's side, came from a small valley in the Alps. In the early 1900s, they would still live in a very rural environment, with no TV, and no electric power, and long dark winter days isolated from the rest of the world by the snow. After their daily chores, they would spend their evenings all together along the fireplace, exchanging tall tales and ghost stories. Then came WW1 and part of the men never came back from the front. Later on, the youngsters started to leave to get better paid jobs in town. The radio, and then the TV made their appearance. And the tradition of long fireside chats slowly vanished. What happened there happened in lots of rural areas in France. The rural exodus was devastating for ghostly tales.
 
I think we had a discussion on here at one point about identifying the era of horsemen - I asked if witnesses could identify whether or not a horse sounded as though it had been shod (there is a lot of difference between the sound of unshod hooves and those wearing metal shoes, particularly on a hard surfaced road). I think it might have been where I was relating the time that I was mistaken for a ghostly horseman, riding past people in fog so thick that they could hear me but not see me.
The particular sighting I'm thinking of, the horse was galloping over short grass, and the rider was half naked, no discernible bridal or saddle - just a wild looking young lad on an unkempt galloping sturdy pony. So I can see why the witnesses thought "iron age" but of course that's not necessarily accurate
 
Similar scenes are likely being repeated right now at Appleby Horse Fair. (I know it's got a rope bridle!)

appleby.jpg
 
Similar scenes are likely being repeated right now at Appleby Horse Fair. (I know it's got a rope bridle!)

View attachment 55990
That's a headcollar, a bridle usually has a bit attached. But then, when I was a wild and pony mad child, we often rode our ponies in only headcollars. And, in summer, the boys would be half naked too!

But I can see how someone seeing a horse (well, if it were Iron Age it would likely be a shaggy native pony breed) galloping towards them with anyone half naked on board, would be disconcerted.
 
Today I went to a lecture by the Assyriologist Irving Finkel, about the First Ghosts (at least partly intended to publish his new book of that name). Fascinating stuff. Finkel has been on TV in various programmes, and is in the Guinness Book of Records as the discoverer of the earliest known image of a ghost, 3500 years old.

Here it is; the ghost is shackled, and is being led back to the Mesopotamian netherworld by a woman, as described on the other side of the tablet in a complex ritual. Irving made the point that the Mesopotamians accepted ghosts as real (and somewhat annoying) facts of life, and they had numerous ways to get rid of them.
ghost1.png
 
I am very envious. I love the lion-hunting scenes on the Assyrian friezes at the BM and Irving Finkel is the sort of lecturer who would get my undivided attention..

doctor-irving-finkel-giving-lecture.jpg
 
Oh I've seen him on some university lectures that are on YouTube. Interesting guy for sure.
 
Today I was watching a YouTuber talking about the Ghosts of Bamburgh castle. It was the usual stuff, lots of 'and she fell in love with a stablehand, was forbidden to marry, so threw herself off the castle walls.' Now, I know a little bit about the history of marriage, and the whole concept of marrying for love, indeed, marrying anyone that your parents hadn't chosen for you, was seriously only for the very poorest. Those who didn't need to secure succession, or who didn't have a large dowry in demand from other families. It is my understanding that marriage of those in the upper crust (ie, the castle and large house owners) was nearly always secured by the family. It was not a love match. In fact, the whole 'love' thing is reasonably modern, in that couples hoping to marry even back in the 1800s would maybe only have met a handful of times, and their idea of romantic love would be a million miles from ours.

So how recent is the idea of 'girls who were thwarted in their desire to marry someone from a lower class killing themselves for love'? Does anyone know? Because, while it gives a great, sorrowful backstory for the tales of white ladies seen throwing themselves from battlements, would it really have happened in such number? Did girls not, mostly, do as they were told by their families and marry Cousin Guy or the son of the next door estate?
 
Today I was watching a YouTuber talking about the Ghosts of Bamburgh castle. It was the usual stuff, lots of 'and she fell in love with a stablehand, was forbidden to marry, so threw herself off the castle walls.' Now, I know a little bit about the history of marriage, and the whole concept of marrying for love, indeed, marrying anyone that your parents hadn't chosen for you, was seriously only for the very poorest. Those who didn't need to secure succession, or who didn't have a large dowry in demand from other families. It is my understanding that marriage of those in the upper crust (ie, the castle and large house owners) was nearly always secured by the family. It was not a love match. In fact, the whole 'love' thing is reasonably modern, in that couples hoping to marry even back in the 1800s would maybe only have met a handful of times, and their idea of romantic love would be a million miles from ours.

So how recent is the idea of 'girls who were thwarted in their desire to marry someone from a lower class killing themselves for love'? Does anyone know? Because, while it gives a great, sorrowful backstory for the tales of white ladies seen throwing themselves from battlements, would it really have happened in such number? Did girls not, mostly, do as they were told by their families and marry Cousin Guy or the son of the next door estate?
We shouldn't apply our modern principles here. It's all about courtly love.

The point isn't that she wasn't allowed to marry the stablehand, as everyone knew this could never have happened. It's that once she'd fallen for a man she couldn't face being married off to the one who'd been chosen for her.

She'd've been better off obediently marrying Sir Dullness and then having him take on the handsome stablehand. That'd work under
courtly love.
Ask the minstrels. :wink2:
 
Back
Top