The Poltergeist Prince of London: The Remarkable True Story of the Battersea Poltergeist

by James Clark, Shirley Hitchings

It began with a key. One afternoon in 1956, in the home of the Hitchings family in Battersea, south London, a small silver key appeared on Shirley Hitchings' bed. This seemingly insignificant event heralded the beginning of one of the most terrifying, incredible and mysterious hauntings in British history. The spirit, who quickly became known as 'Donald', began to communicate, initially via tapping sounds, but over time - and with the encouragement of psychical researcher Harold Chibbett, whose case-files appear here – by learning to write. Soon, the spirit had begun to make simply incredible claims about his identity, insisting that he was one of the most famous figures in world history – but what was the truth? Here, for the first time, is the full story, told by the woman right at the heart of it all – Shirley herself.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Horror, Paranormal

364 pages, Kindle Edition

First published October 1, 2013

Reviews

[Duncan Barford · Rating 5 out of 5]

Some chocolate is left for a poltergeist, then found broken up a few days later with an accompanying note: ‘VOUS CAN HAVE A BIT’ (p. 216).

Question: would this note seem to you more likely to have been written by (1) the spirit of a former king of France; or (2) a fifteen year-old girl from Battersea, who had never learnt French at school, but was known to own a French dictionary?

Perhaps the oddest thing about the case of the Battersea poltergeist (1956-1964) is that its investigator, Harold Chibbett, devoted so much time and energy towards establishing whether the phenomena were caused by a spirit formerly King Louis XVII of France. Reconstructed from notes rescued from Chibbett’s posthumous papers, there is more than enough detail here (I think) to suggest that teenage angst and dissociative states probably played a far greater role in the happenings at 63 Wycliffe Road than any alleged spirits.

But, as with many poltergeist cases, it would be too glib to write it all off as due to psychological causes. The happenings certainly centred around Shirley Hitchings, co-author of the book, yet there were numerous witnesses and a range of phenomena that included movement of objects, voices without evident physical cause, apparent telepathic and precognitive phenomena, and highly frequent (but elusive) knocking and tapping sounds, on occasion so loud they could be heard in the street.

Like the classic Enfield case, it’s a huge mess: a melange of psychological disturbance, possible hoax, and lack of investigative controls, but with just enough nuggets of what seems genuinely inexplicable to string along everyone involved in the case, and also to engage the reader of this account. James Clark does a great job of laying out the material in a more or less chronological order, whilst imparting a vivid sense of its main protagonists: the feisty Shirley, the avuncular Chibbet, and the imperiously parochial poltergeist himself, ‘Donald’.

But despite the mayhem of the surface narrative there are serious issues at stake, such as the possibility of collusion between investigator and witnesses, because Chibbet evidently provided Shirley with opportunities and contacts she could not have enjoyed otherwise, and he in turn was provided with material for his spiritualist-oriented researches. In the latter half of the book it becomes especially apparent just how much of Chibbett’s interaction with the poltergeist boiled down to a power struggle, a bargaining for information that the polt never quite delivered.

And then there is Ethel, Shirley’s grandmother, whose death was perhaps tragically hastened by the happenings in the house. Understandably, this angle is not highlighted by the authors, but it’s clear that Ethel of all the householders took the firmest stand again ‘Donald’ and most assertively laid the blame at Shirley’s door. I couldn’t help feeling that maybe she paid the ultimate price for her resistance, although I would not want to imply that anyone was intentionally culpable.

The book has all the hallmarks of a classic in its field. It is rich and detailed and captures the flavour of the era in which the case took place. It also raises a question common to every classic poltergeist case: if only strict experimental controls had been in place, would anything have been reported at all? One day, I hope, there will be a case that provides the answer.

[Julie Kilburn · Rating 1 out of 5]

Absolutely dire. I do believe the house was visited by a supernatural spirit but the endless recording of tedious incidents and messages goes on chapter after chapter. This story could have been told on one A4 piece of paper and been mildly interesting. Waste of time and money. In fact I read a brief account in the newspaper which easily covered all that happened.

[Angie and the Daily Book Dose · Rating 3 out of 5]

Well, the poltergeist who wasn't? I must say that I am not convinced that Shirley Hitchings ever experienced and paranormal or occult activity at all. This whole thing seems absurd. The only real thing I thought that was interesting or of note was the poltergeist's knowledge of a sweet shop. This however makes no sense to me. No way would the real dauphin of France go anywhere near a confectionery ever in the 1700's; especially one under the age of 10.

This book was a letdown. I'm of the opinion that Shirley was suffering from a mental health issue.

[Jo · Rating 4 out of 5]

In the 1950s poltergeist activity began in an unassuming house in London. It was mostly centred around teenaged Shirley Hitchings. Some decades later, working with an author, Shirley attempts to write the story of that time. I found this absolutely fascinating but I remain sceptical. It seems a bit weird that an 18th century French prince would be obsessed with handsome young actors and musicians. There are some aspects that can't be explained but I was left feeling that a major part was something to do with Shirley (either knowingly faking or a projection of her subconscious).

[Jacqueline Ferguson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Was hoping for a conclusive ending but will settle for the unknown.

[Nancy · Rating 1 out of 5]

So boring, the sheer repetition of information put me to sleep within twenty minutes every night. Sad that the one researcher spent so much of his life on this case with so little real evidence of the paranormal. Some interesting bits, but very few. Skip this one folks...or read an article somewhere online about it in ten minutes.

[Steve Parcell · Rating 2 out of 5]

I am not sure I know really what to make of this book. It was ok although too long and a little monotonous.

I truly believe that Shirley and her family experienced some poltergeist activity. Equally I think many of the letters were actually written by Shirley and not Donald the poltergeist. The whole piece around Donald actually being the Dauphin of the last King of France just feels too ridiculous and it is something that could have been created by someone reading books on the subject.

I believe that the book could have been much better but lacked any passion in my opinion.

[Rachael Eyre · Rating 3 out of 5]

Fascinating story but mired in too much unnecessary detail. Can’t help thinking Shirley colluded with her brother to create Donald, considering how nearly everything he did benefited her. Maybe she had a dissociative personality disorder, but we’re unlikely to ever get to the truth, considering all the main players are dead.

I would recommend listening to The Battersea Poltergeist podcast instead.

[Tess · Rating 1 out of 5]

I’ll be honest I gave up at 37%.

One star seems unfair especially as I don’t think I’m the intended audience HOWEVER I do struggle to imagine who the audience is for this anyway...

[Rich · Rating 2 out of 5]

I wasn't overly impressed by this book unfortunately. Whilst I did manage to finish it in the hope that some evidence might be presented to try and support the claims of paranormal activity, it was never to be.

Pretty much everything that happened could easily be staged and the whole thing just comes across as an elaborate hoax by a girl trying to manipulate people in to giving her things she wanted (haircuts, dresses and the like).

The researcher ("Chibs") who performed the investigations at the time was far too eager to fit information obtained from "Donald" in to known historical fact, ignoring logic and essentially trying as hard as possible to make things fit, which is hardly the way to conduct any form of experiment.

The fact that the letters supposedly written by Donald suffered from the exact same types of spelling mistakes as those made by Shirley is glossed over and attributed to the poltergeist using her as a conduit. However, as another reviewer mentioned, the level of French used in some of the letters is extremely basic, with the odd "Vous" included in otherwise poorly written english sentences, hardly the level of French you'd expect from the son of Louis XVII. The excuse made that "French has changed since I was alive" is simply ludicrous and the fact this was eagerly taken as an acceptable excuse by the original researcher should tell you a lot.

From what I can tell there is no actual documented evidence of anything listed in this book as evidence of supernatural activity. I suspect because, in this case at last, it's a whole bunch of nonsense.

[katooola · Rating 4 out of 5]

#współpracabarterowa

Uwielbiacie zjawiska paranormalne?👻 Jeśli tak, to ta książka jest dla Was!

Wszystko zaczęło się od tajemniczego... srebrnego klucza, który pojawił się znikąd na łóżku Shirley. Takie niepozorne zdarzenie wywróciło do góry nogami spokojne życie rodziny Hitchingsów w domu przy Wycliffe Road 63. Klucz okazał się zapowiedzią pojawienia się poltergeista zwanego Donaldem...

Historię tę poznajemy dzięki zapiskom Chibbetta, które udało się po jego śmierci odratować. Poltergeist z początku swą obecność zaznaczał upiornym stukaniem, ale z czasem sytuacja się zaogniała, dochodziło do przedziwnych zjawisk telekinetycznych.

Niedługo potem poltergeist zaczął przekazywać niewiarygodne informacje na swój temat... Enigmatyczny duch za namową Chibbetta zaczął pisać listy, coś niespotykanego!

Te wszystkie przedziwne zdarzenia będące udręką dla całej rodziny zdawały się mieć coś wspólnego z Shirley... Czy to zjawa, a może mistyfikacja? Czy to sprawka piętnastoletniej dziewczyny?

Autorzy idealnie ukazali klimat lat 50. XX wieku. To nie tylko fascynująco niepokojąca historia nadprzyrodzonej obecności, ale także próby wyjaśnienia zjawisk psychokinetycznych czy telepatycznych. To przede wszystkim historia o rodzinnym dramacie, o tym jak codzienne życie zwyczajnych ludzi zostało zaburzone przez nękający ich byt. Nieważne, czy wierzymy w nadnaturalne siły, czy nie, coś zaburzyło spokój rodziny Hitchingsów i te traumatyczne przeżycia odcisnęły na nich piętno.

Mam sporo sceptycznych odczuć, co do prawdziwości kolejnych zdarzeń, jednak przyjemnie spędziłam czas z tą książką. Opowieść jest makabryczna, barwna i z pewnością nietuzinkowa na tle innych opowieści traktujących o hałaśliwych duchach.

Książka wprost idealna na jesienne wieczory. Tylko uważajcie, żebyście po lekturze sami nie wywołali czyjejś obecności...👻

[Don · Rating 3 out of 5]

Interesting

Enjoyed this book but over time became convinced that it isn't true. That's from starting with an open mind. Must admit I cannot really explain why I came to that conclusion. Also still many aspects I cannot explain.

[Philip Dawson · Rating 4 out of 5]

Prince or not?


This is a fascinating story, if a little laborious to read, reading it, I occasionally got lost with, the documented facts of the research that was going on throughout the book!
Nevertheless this is a good book, if not as spine tingling as other ghostly stories.

[Katy Gordon · Rating 5 out of 5]

Hilarious. I’ve not enjoyed a book this much for months.

[Gabrysia · Rating 4 out of 5]

Pretty good but sometimes a bit monotonous. Worth reading:)

[Angie Rhodes · Rating 5 out of 5]

A really interesting book, Creepy in all the right places, , If you like haunted house stories, , this is for you,,