WATER DIVINING

Greymouth Evening Star, 16 January 1928, Page 10

WATER DIVINING

FRAUD OR SPECIAL GIFT?

Whether water diviners were frauds, unconscious impostors, or spe-cially-gifted persons, was discussed in a paper by Professor J. W. Gregory, D.Sc., F.R.S., read recently before the Public Works, Roads, and Transport Congress, reports the London “Daily Telegraph.” In a preliminary account of medieval and modern use of the rod for divination, Professor Gregory said that its value had been a subject of perennial controversy. Its use was denounced as idolatrous by the medieval Church, and forbidden by the Inquisition for the detection of crime. It had been repeatedly repudiated after careful testing by men of science and water supply engineers. Nevertheless, the divining rod had been commended by bishops and lesser clerics, men, learned in higher physics had suggested that modern discoveries might explain its action, and it was employed by people whose judgment carried great weight. The rod had unquestionably been often successful, and it was perhaps more used now than at any previous time owing to the increased need for small, shallow supplies of water. The use of the rod went back to ancient times. It was, doubtless, the virgula divina of the ancients, and it was claimed as the rod of Moses that provided the Israelites water in the desert. Its modern use was apparently begun by German medieval miners in their search for metals. In the Middle Ages it was employed for the detection of all sorts of materials —water, buried treasure, land-marks, metals, and murderers. Professor Gregory told how one, Aymar, in 1692, traced, by the rod, some murderers from Lyons, down the Rhone Valley, until one of them was found at Beaucaire. The man was arrested, charged with the murder, add confessed. Aymar was employed in a later murder case. He was led, blindfold, over ground saturated with the blood of the '■victim, but the rod gave no indication, and he was ultimately found to be a fraud. His first success had probably been due to his having known who the murderers were, and tracking them by ordinary means. The use of the rod had now been generally abandoned except for water, though' it had been extensively em-

ployed in America in search for ores

and oil. The use of employing a water-diviner was at one time disallowed by the Board of Trade, and members of city councils responsible for such expenditure had to pay. Later decision had made the operations recommended by a diviner a legitimate charge upon the rates. Firm faith in the rod had been expressed by bishops and members of Parliament, and in recent work on the foundations of St. Paul’s Cathedral, the contractors used a diviner to determine the positions of water under the crypt. “The claims,” said the professor, "for the success of the water divining are innumerable; the practice is common throughout the civilised world, and its champions claim that its efficiency is established beyond reasonable doubt.” Going on to describe the method of employment, he said that the rod .usually used was a twig of hazel, with the forked ends about lOin. to 18in. in length, and butt a. few inches long. It must be' tough and springy, and therefore should be freshly cut. Whatever might be the ultimate cause of the movement of the rod, the immediate cause was almost universally recognised as some conscious or subconscious movement of the diviner’s hands. There were three rival lines of explanation. The first, that the rod responded directly to some external physical influence, had been encouraged by the discovery of radio activity. It was not to be dismissed as impossible, but so widespread and powerful a force ought to be easily demonstrated. Another explanation was that the movement of the rod was due, though perhaps unconsciously, to the diviner, and the view that the action of the rod was physic and not physical was supported by the fact that, any rod would serve. In the early days it had to be a twig cut about sunset or sunrise by a man standing in a particular position and with the sunlight shining through the .fork. Noiy any twig served, and on the treeless plains of Australia, a piece of iron wire taken from the fence would act as well, or a piece of clock spring. Then there was the view that the diviner unconsciously or subconsciously moved the rod owing to an impulse due to unintentional suggestion from the bystanders or by his recognition of indications favourable for water. Some dowsers might be deliberate frauds, others might be duped by their vanity, and many of the best probably acted by their disassociated mental activities. The decision between the conflicting explanations must depend upon the evidence, and this was overwhelming in quantity. Results of many tests both in regard to water divining, metal location and oil smelling were described by the professor. In the case of oil, a trial carried out by Sir John Cadman had resulted in a “complete fiasco/’ Experts on water supply with the National Geological Surveys had often reported on divining, and so far as the professor, unanimously against it. The author of a United States geological survey memoir had said:

“It is difficult to see how for practical purposes the entire matter could be more thoroughly discredited, and it should be obvious to everyone that further tests by the United States Geological Survey of this so-called ‘witching’ for water, oil, or other minerals would be a misuse of public funds.”

Summing up the results of the various tests, Professor Gregory stated: “Testing the divining rod is difficult, and promises no answer that* will be universally accepted, because the claims of the different diviners are so contradictory and elusive that any test may apply only to the individual tested, and perhaps only to him on a particular day. Failures are explained as due to the incompetence of the diviner tested or to some accident which neutralised the effect of the subject, sought. . . . The suc-

cessful diviner is probably a quick observer who has usually had considerable experience in the search for water. As he goes over the ground he recognises clues to the presence of underground water, which subconsciously leads to some movement of the strained muscles of the hand. . . In other cases, the reputation of the diviner is made by lucky coincidences which are remembered and exaggerated, while the failures are. forgotten . . . . A diviner working over a level sheet of clay may feel that the prospects are unfavourable, and in his discouragement the sudden contraction of a finger is not likely to happen.

and he is preserved from failure. Even under conditions to which diviners are

accustomed, their percentage of successes appears to be largely a matter of chance. Some diviners are especially quick in detecting the faint clues ,and in areas where diviners are mostly used a large number of successes is inevitable owing to the wide distribution of underground water.”