I emphasize the row-formation of cup marks:

Prof. Douglas (_Saturday Review_, Nov. 24, 1883):

"Whatever may have been their motive, the cup-markers showed a decided

liking for arranging their sculpturings in regularly spaced rows."

That cup marks are an archaic form of inscription was first suggested by

Canon Greenwell many years ago. But more specifically adumbratory to our

own expression are the observations of Rivett-Carnac (_Jour. Roy.

Asiatic Soc._, 1903-515):

That the Braille system of raised dots is an inverted arrangement of cup

marks: also that there are strong resemblances to the Morse code. But no

tame and systematized archaeologist can do more than casually point out

resemblances, and merely suggest that strings of cup marks look like

messages, because--China, Switzerland, Algeria, America--if messages

they be, there seems to be no escape from attributing one origin to

them--then, if messages they be, I accept one external origin, to which

the whole surface of this earth was accessible, for them.

Something else that we emphasize:

That rows of cup marks have often been likened to footprints.

But, in this similitude, their unilinear arrangement must be

disregarded--of course often they're mixed up in every way, but

arrangement in single lines is very common. It is odd that they should

so often be likened to footprints: I suppose there are exceptional

cases, but unless it's something that hops on one foot, or a cat going

along a narrow fence-top, I don't think of anything that makes

footprints one directly ahead of another--Cop, in a station house,

walking a chalk line, perhaps.

Upon the Witch's Stone, near Ratho, Scotland, there are twenty-four

cups, varying in size from one and a half to three inches in diameter,

arranged in approximately straight lines. Locally it is explained that

these are tracks of dogs' feet (_Proc. Soc. Antiq. Scotland_, 2-4-79).

Similar marks are scattered bewilderingly all around the Witch's

Stone--like a frenzy of telegraphing, or like messages repeating and

repeating, trying to localize differently.

In Inverness-shire, cup marks are called "fairies' footmarks." At

Valna's church, Norway, and St. Peter's, Ambleteuse, there are such

marks, said to be horses' hoofprints. The rocks of Clare, Ireland, are

marked with prints supposed to have been made by a mythical cow

(_Folklore_, 21-184).

We now have such a ghost of a thing that I'd not like to be interpreted

as offering it as a datum: it simply illustrates what I mean by the

notion of symbols, like cups, or like footprints, which, if like those

of horses or cows, are the reverse of, or the negatives of, cups--of

symbols that are regularly received somewhere upon this earth--steep,

conical hill, somewhere, I think--but that have often alighted in wrong

places--considerably to the mystification of persons waking up some

morning to find them upon formerly blank spaces.

An ancient record--still worse, an ancient Chinese record--of a

courtyard of a palace--dwellers of the palace waking up one morning,

finding the courtyard marked with tracks like the footprints of an

ox--supposed that the devil did it. (_Notes and Queries_, 9-6-225.)

16.

Angels.

Hordes upon hordes of them.

Beings massed like the clouds of souls, or the commingling whiffs of

spirituality, or the exhalations of souls that Dore pictured so often.

It may be that the Milky Way is a composition of stiff, frozen,

finally-static, absolute angels. We shall have data of little Milky

Ways, moving swiftly; or data of hosts of angels, not absolute, or still

dynamic. I suspect, myself, that the fixed stars are really fixed, and

that the minute motions said to have been detected in them are

illusions. I think that the fixed stars are absolutes. Their twinkling

is only the interpretation by an intermediatist state of them. I think

that soon after Leverrier died, a new fixed star was discovered--that,

if Dr. Gray had stuck to his story of the thousands of fishes from one

pail of water, had written upon it, lectured upon it, taken to street

corners, to convince the world that, whether conceivable or not, his

explanation was the only true explanation: had thought of nothing but

this last thing at night and first thing in the morning--his

obituary--another "nova" reported in _Monthly Notices_.

I think that Milky Ways, of an inferior, or dynamic, order, have often

been seen by astronomers. Of course it may be that the phenomena that we

shall now consider are not angels at all. We are simply feeling around,

trying to find out what we can accept. Some of our data indicate hosts

of rotund and complacent tourists in inter-planetary space--but then

data of long, lean, hungry ones. I think that there are, out in

inter-planetary space, Super Tamerlanes at the head of hosts of

celestial ravagers--which have come here and pounced upon civilizations

of the past, cleaning them up all but their bones, or temples and

monuments--for which later historians have invented exclusionist

histories. But if something now has a legal right to us, and can

enforce its proprietorship, they've been warned off. It's the way of all

exploitation. I should say that we're now under cultivation: that we're

conscious of it, but have the impertinence to attribute it all to our

own nobler and higher instincts.

Against these notions is the same sense of finality that opposes all

advance. It's why we rate acceptance as a better adaptation than belief.

Opposing us is the strong belief that, as to inter-planetary phenomena,

virtually everything has been found out. Sense of finality and illusion

of homogeneity. But that what is called advancing knowledge is violation

of the sense of blankness.

A drop of water. Once upon a time water was considered so homogeneous

that it was thought of as an element. The microscope--and not only that

the supposititiously elementary was seen to be of infinite diversity,

but that in its protoplasmic life there were new orders of beings.

Or the year 1491--and a European looking westward over the ocean--his

feeling that that suave western droop was unbreakable; that gods of

regularity would not permit that smooth horizon to be disturbed by

coasts or spotted with islands. The unpleasantness of even contemplating

such a state--wide, smooth west, so clean against the sky--spotted with

islands--geographic leprosy.

But coasts and islands and Indians and bison, in the seemingly vacant

west: lakes, mountains, rivers--

One looks up at the sky: the relative homogeneity of the

relatively unexplored: one thinks of only a few kinds of phenomena.

But the acceptance is forced upon me that there are modes and modes

and modes of inter-planetary existence: things as different from

planets and comets and meteors as Indians are from bison and prairie

dogs: a super-geography--or celestiography--of vast stagnant regions,

but also of Super-Niagaras and Ultra-Mississippis: and a

super-sociology--voyagers and tourists and ravagers: the hunted and the

hunting: the super-mercantile, the super-piratic, the super-evangelical.

Sense of homogeneity, or our positivist illusion of the unknown--and the

fate of all positivism.

Astronomy and the academic.

Ethics and the abstract.

The universal attempt to formulate or to regularize--an attempt that can

be made only by disregarding or denying.

Or all things disregard or deny that which will eventually invade and

destroy them--

Until comes the day when some one thing shall say, and enforce upon

Infinitude:

"Thus far shalt thou go: here is absolute demarcation."

The final utterance:

"There is only I."

In the _Monthly Notices of the R.A.S._, 11-48, there is a letter from

the Rev. W. Read:

That, upon the 4th of September, 1851, at 9:30 A.M., he had seen a host

of self-luminous bodies, passing the field of his telescope, some slowly

and some rapidly. They appeared to occupy a zone several degrees in

breadth. The direction of most of them was due east to west, but some

moved from north to south. The numbers were tremendous. They were

observed for six hours.

Editor's note:

"May not these appearances be attributed to an abnormal state of the

optic nerves of the observer?"

In _Monthly Notices_, 12-38, Mr. Read answers that he had been a

diligent observer, with instruments of a superior order, for about 28

years--"but I have never witnessed such an appearance before." As to

illusion he says that two other members of his family had seen the

objects.

The Editor withdraws his suggestion.

We know what to expect. Almost absolutely--in an existence that is

essentially Hibernian--we can predict the past--that is, look over

something of this kind, written in 1851, and know what to expect from

the Exclusionists later. If Mr. Read saw a migration of dissatisfied

angels, numbering millions, they must merge away, at least subjectively,

with commonplace terrestrial phenomena--of course disregarding Mr.

Read's probable familiarity, of 28 years' duration, with the

commonplaces of terrestrial phenomena.

_Monthly Notices_, 12-183:

Letter from Rev. W.R. Dawes:

That he had seen similar objects--and in the month of September--that

they were nothing but seeds floating in the air.

In the _Report of the British Association_, 1852-235, there is a

communication from Mr. Read to Prof. Baden-Powell:

That the objects that had been seen by him and by Mr. Dawes were not

similar. He denies that he had seen seeds floating in the air. There had

been little wind, and that had come from the sea, where seeds would not

be likely to have origin. The objects that he had seen were round and

sharply defined, and with none of the feathery appearance of

thistledown. He then quotes from a letter from C.B. Chalmers, F.R.A.S.,

who had seen a similar stream, a procession, or migration, except that

some of the bodies were more elongated--or lean and hungry--than

globular.

He might have argued for sixty-five years. He'd have impressed

nobody--of importance. The super-motif, or dominant, of his era, was

Exclusionism, and the notion of seeds in the air assimilates--with due

disregards--with that dominant.

Or pageantries here upon our earth, and things looking down upon us--and

the Crusades were only dust clouds, and glints of the sun on shining

armor were only particles of mica in dust clouds. I think it was a

Crusade that Read saw--but that it was right, relatively to the year

1851, to say that it was only seeds in the wind, whether the wind blew

from the sea or not. I think of things that were luminous with religious

zeal, mixed up, like everything else in Intermediateness, with black

marauders and from gray to brown beings of little personal ambitions.

There may have been a Richard Coeur de Lion, on his way to right

wrongs in Jupiter. It was right, relatively to 1851, to say that he was

a seed of a cabbage.

Prof. Coffin, U.S.N. (_Jour. Frank. Inst._, 88-151):

That, during the eclipse of August, 1869, he had noted the passage,

across his telescope, of several bright flakes resembling thistleblows,

floating in the sunlight. But the telescope was so focused that, if

these things were distinct, they must have been so far away from this

earth that the difficulties of orthodoxy remain as great, one way or

another, no matter what we think they were--

They were "well-defined," says Prof. Coffin.

Henry Waldner (_Nature_, 5-304):

That, April 27, 1863, he had seen great numbers of small, shining bodies

passing from west to east. He had notified Dr. Wolf, of the Observatory

of Zurich, who "had convinced himself of this strange phenomenon." Dr.

Wolf had told him that similar bodies had been seen by Sig. Capocci, of

the Capodimonte Observatory, at Naples, May 11, 1845.

The shapes were of great diversity--or different aspects of similar

shapes?

Appendages were seen upon some of them.

We are told that some were star-shaped, with transparent appendages.

I think, myself, it was a Mohammed and his Hegira. May have been only

his harem. Astonishing sensation: afloat in space with ten million wives

around one. Anyway, it would seem that we have considerable advantage

here, inasmuch as seeds are not in season in April--but the pulling back

to earth, the bedraggling by those sincere but dull ones of some time

ago. We have the same stupidity--necessary, functioning stupidity--of

attribution of something that was so rare that an astronomer notes only

one instance between 1845 and 1863, to an every-day occurrence--

Or Mr. Waldner's assimilative opinion that he had seen only ice

crystals.

Whether they were not very exclusive veils of a super-harem, or planes

of a very light material, we have an impression of star-shaped things

with transparent appendages that have been seen in the sky.

Hosts of small bodies--black, this time--that were seen by the

astronomers Herrick, Buys-Ballot, and De Cuppis (_L'Annee Scientifique_,

1860-25); vast numbers of bodies that were seen by M. Lamey, to cross

the moon (_L'Annee Scientifique_, 1874-62); another instance of dark

ones; prodigious number of dark, spherical bodies reported by Messier,

June 17, 1777 (Arago, _OEuvres_, 9-38); considerable number of

luminous bodies which appeared to move out from the sun, in diverse

directions; seen at Havana, during eclipse of the sun, May 15, 1836, by

Prof. Auber (Poey); M. Poey cites a similar instance, of Aug. 3, 1886;

M. Lotard's opinion that they were birds (_L'Astronomie_, 1886-391);

large number of small bodies crossing disk of the sun, some swiftly,

some slowly; most of them globular, but some seemingly triangular, and

some of more complicated structure; seen by M. Trouvelet, who, whether

seeds, insects, birds, or other commonplace things, had never seen

anything resembling these forms (_L'Annee Scientifique_, 1885-8); report

from the Rio de Janeiro Observatory, of vast numbers of bodies crossing

the sun, some of them luminous and some of them dark, from some time in

December, 1875, until Jan. 22, 1876 (_La Nature_, 1876-384).

Of course, at a distance, any form is likely to look round or roundish:

but we point out that we have notes upon the seeming of more complex

forms. In _L'Astronomie_, 1886-70, is recorded M. Briguiere's

observation, at Marseilles, April 15 and April 25, 1883, upon the

crossing of the sun by bodies that were irregular in form. Some of them

moved as if in alignment.

Letter from Sir Robert Inglis to Col. Sabine (_Rept. Brit. Assoc._,

1849-17):

That, at 3 P.M., Aug. 8, 1849, at Gais, Switzerland, Inglis had seen

thousands and thousands of brilliant white objects, like snowflakes in a

cloudless sky. Though this display lasted about twenty-five minutes, not

one of these seeming snowflakes was seen to fall. Inglis says that his

servant "fancied" that he had seen something like wings on

these--whatever they were. Upon page 18, of the _Report_, Sir John

Herschel says that, in 1845 or 1846, his attention had been attracted by

objects of considerable size, in the air, seemingly not far away. He had

looked at them through a telescope. He says that they were masses of

hay, not less than a yard or two in diameter. Still there are some

circumstances that interest me. He says that, though no less than a

whirlwind could have sustained these masses, the air about him was calm.

"No doubt wind prevailed at the spot, but there was no roaring noise."

None of these masses fell within his observation or knowledge. To walk a

few fields away and find out more would seem not much to expect from a

man of science, but it is one of our superstitions, that such a seeming

trifle is just what--by the Spirit of an Era, we'll call it--one is not

permitted to do. If those things were not masses of hay, and if Herschel

had walked a little and found out, and had reported that he had seen

strange objects in the air--that report, in 1846, would have been as

misplaced as the appearance of a tail upon an embryo still in its

gastrula era. I have noticed this inhibition in my own case many times.

Looking back--why didn't I do this or that little thing that would have

cost so little and have meant so much? Didn't belong to that era of my

own development.

_Nature_, 22-64:

That, at Kattenau, Germany, about half an hour before sunrise, March 22,

1880, "an enormous number of luminous bodies rose from the horizon, and

passed in a horizontal direction from east to west." They are described

as having appeared in a zone or belt. "They shone with a remarkably

brilliant light."

So they've thrown lassos over our data to bring them back to earth. But

they're lassos that cannot tighten. We can't pull out of them: we may

step out of them, or lift them off. Some of us used to have an

impression of Science sitting in calm, just judgment: some of us now

feel that a good many of our data have been lynched. If a Crusade,

perhaps from Mars to Jupiter, occur in the autumn--"seeds." If a Crusade

or outpouring of celestial vandals is seen from this earth in the

spring--"ice crystals." If we have record of a race of aerial beings,

perhaps with no substantial habitat, seen by someone in

India--"locusts."

This will be disregarded:

If locusts fly high, they freeze and fall in thousands.

_Nature_, 47-581:

Locusts that were seen in the mountains of India, at a height of 12,750

feet--"in swarms and dying by thousands."

But no matter whether they fly high or fly low, no one ever wonders

what's in the air when locusts are passing overhead, because of the

falling of stragglers. I have especially looked this matter up--no

mystery when locusts are flying overhead--constant falling of

stragglers.

_Monthly Notices_, 30-135:

"An unusual phenomenon noticed by Lieut. Herschel, Oct. 17 and 18, 1870,

while observing the sun, at Bangalore, India."

Lieut. Herschel had noticed dark shadows crossing the sun--but away from

the sun there were luminous, moving images. For two days bodies passed

in a continuous stream, varying in size and velocity.

The Lieutenant tries to explain, as we shall see, but he says:

"As it was, the continuous flight, for two whole days, in such numbers,

in the upper regions of the air, of beasts that left no stragglers, is a

wonder of natural history, if not of astronomy."

He tried different focusing--he saw wings--perhaps he saw planes. He

says that he saw upon the objects either wings or phantom-like

appendages.

Then he saw something that was so bizarre that, in the fullness of his

nineteenth-centuriness, he writes:

"There was no longer doubt: they were locusts or flies of some sort."

One of them had paused.

It had hovered.

Then it had whisked off.

The Editor says that at that time "countless locusts had descended upon

certain parts of India."

We now have an instance that is extraordinary in several

respects--super-voyagers or super-ravagers; angels, ragamuffins,

crusaders, emigrants, aeronauts, or aerial elephants, or bison or

dinosaurs--except that I think the thing had planes or wings--one of

them has been photographed. It may be that in the history of photography

no more extraordinary picture than this has ever been taken.

_L'Astronomie_, 1885-347:

That, at the Observatory of Zacatecas, Mexico, Aug. 12, 1883, about

2,500 meters above sea level, were seen a large number of small luminous

bodies, entering upon the disk of the sun. M. Bonilla telegraphed to the

Observatories of the City of Mexico and of Puebla. Word came back that

the bodies were not visible there. Because of this parallax, M. Bonilla

placed the bodies "relatively near the earth." But when we find out what

he called "relatively near the earth"--birds or bugs or hosts of a

Super-Tamerlane or army of a celestial Richard Coeur de Lion--our

heresies rejoice anyway. His estimate is "less distance than the moon."

One of them was photographed. See _L'Astronomie_, 1885-349. The

photograph shows a long body surrounded by indefinite structures, or by

the haze of wings or planes in motion.

_L'Astronomie_, 1887-66;

Signer Ricco, of the Observatory of Palermo, writes that, Nov. 30, 1880,

at 8:30 o'clock in the morning, he was watching the sun, when he saw,

slowly traversing its disk, bodies in two long, parallel lines, and a

shorter, parallel line. The bodies looked winged to him. But so large

were they that he had to think of large birds. He thought of cranes.

He consulted ornithologists, and learned that the configuration of

parallel lines agrees with the flight-formation of cranes. This was in

1880: anybody now living in New York City, for instance, would tell him

that also it is a familiar formation of aeroplanes. But, because of data

of focus and subtended angles, these beings or objects must have been

high.

Sig. Ricco argues that condors have been known to fly three or four

miles high, and that heights reached by other birds have been estimated

at two or three miles. He says that cranes have been known to fly so

high that they have been lost to view.

Our own acceptance, in conventional terms, is that there is not a bird

of this earth that would not freeze to death at a height of more than

four miles: that if condors fly three or four miles high, they are birds

that are especially adapted to such altitudes.

Sig. Ricco's estimate is that these objects or beings or cranes must

have been at least five and a half miles high.

17

The vast dark thing that looked like a poised crow of unholy dimensions.

Assuming that I shall ever have any readers, let him, or both of them,

if I shall ever have such popularity as that, note how dim that bold

black datum is at the distance of only two chapters.

The question:

Was it a thing or the shadow of a thing?

Acceptance either way calls not for mere revision but revolution in the

science of astronomy. But the dimness of the datum of only two chapters

ago. The carved stone disk of Tarbes, and the rain that fell every

afternoon for twenty--if I haven't forgotten, myself, whether it was

twenty-three or twenty-five days!--upon one small area. We are all

Thomsons, with brains that have smooth and slippery, though corrugated,

surfaces--or that all intellection is associative--or that we remember

that which correlates with a dominant--and a few chapters go by, and

there's scarcely an impression that hasn't slid off our smooth and

slippery brains, of Leverrier and the "planet Vulcan." There are two

ways by which irreconcilables can be remembered--if they can be

correlated in a system more nearly real than the system that rejects

them--and by repetition and repetition and repetition.

Vast black thing like a crow poised over the moon.

The datum is so important to us, because it enforces, in another field,

our acceptance that dark bodies of planetary size traverse this solar

system.

Our position:

That the things have been seen:

Also that their shadows have been seen.

Vast black thing poised like a crow over the moon. So far it is a single

instance. By a single instance, we mean the negligible.

In _Popular Science_, 34-158, Serviss tells of a shadow that Schroeter

saw, in 1788, in the lunar Alps. First he saw a light. But then, when

this region was illuminated, he saw a round shadow where the light had

been.

Our own expression:

That he saw a luminous object near the moon: that that part of the moon

became illuminated, and the object was lost to view; but that then its

shadow underneath was seen.

Serviss explains, of course. Otherwise he'd not be Prof. Serviss. It's a

little contest in relative approximations to realness. Prof. Serviss

thinks that what Schroeter saw was the "round" shadow of a mountain--in

the region that had become lighted. He assumes that Schroeter never

looked again to see whether the shadow could be attributed to a

mountain. That's the crux: conceivably a mountain could cast a

round--and that means detached--shadow, in the lighted part of the moon.

Prof. Serviss could, of course, explain why he disregards the light in

the first place--maybe it had always been there "in the first place." If

he couldn't explain, he'd still be an amateur.

The Book of the Damned · 第 84 / 102 题