Naturgeschichte der Gespenster

by Roger Clarke

Wer hatte im Dunklen noch nie das Gefühl, verfolgt zu werden, wer hat noch nie unerklärliche Geräusche gehört? Egal wie aufgeklärt wir unser Leben gestalten, nur wenige von uns sind völlig immun gegen die Erfahrung des Unheimlichen, gegen wohligen Grusel und nächtliche Angst. Doch was steckt hinter dem, was wir "Spuk" nennen, worüber reden wir, wenn wir von "Gespenstern" sprechen? Diese Fragen treiben Roger Clarke seit frühester Jugend um.
Das Ergebnis seiner lebenslangen Recherche und Obsession ist dieses ungeheuer unterhaltsame Buch, geschrieben nicht ohne ironische Distanz, doch stets präzise wie eine kriminalistische Beweisaufnahme. Clarke nimmt an Séancen teil und übernachtet in verhexten Häusern, beleuchtet okkulte Praktiken und übernatürliche Phänomene, er erzählt die Schauder erregendsten Geistergeschichten von der Antike bis in unsere Gegenwart. Clarke berichtet von Praktiken der Geisterbeschwörungen und Kontaktaufnahmen ins Jenseits ebenso wie von den modernsten Techniken der Gespensterjäger, untersucht aber auch die physikalischen und sozialen Aspekte des Spuks. Er entwirft eine Taxonomie der Gespenster, klassifiziert Wiedergänger und Poltergeister, Zeitreisephänomene und beseelte Gegenstände: Roger Clarkes "Naturgeschichte" ist ein gelehrter Universalführer durch die Welt der Spuks.

Genres: Nonfiction, History, Paranormal, Ghosts, Horror, Ghost Stories, Science

336 pages, Hardcover

First published November 1, 2012

About the author

I was educated at Oxford University where I read English at Magdalen. I've written about books and film for 20 years, at one point writing three weekly columns for The Independent newspaper. I've written an opera libretto, performed at the Almeida Theatre in 1993, and a wrote a book of poetry when I was a student. I was for two years the UK London correspondent for the Zagat food guides. 'Ghosts' is a return to a subject that fascinated me as a child.

Reviews

[Jill H. · Rating 3 out of 5]

I am my librarian's test subject! He asked me to read this book since he might read it and wanted my opinion. He won't be happy!

I will give credit to the author as he is not one of those television "ghost hunters" which seem to be popular; instead he is a serious student of the phenomenon of spirits/ghosts and approaches the subject without bias. He does, however, believe that there is "something" out there periodically which cannot be explained. So far, so good.

What caused me to give this book only three stars that it mostly concentrated on events that happened 200 or more years ago when people were still burning witches. The stories passed down through the centuries are just not believable. I couldn't stay interested in them after about the third incident and longed for something set in more modern times. He does touch briefly on a few of them but I was fairly bored by the end of the book.

He has a good writing style which kept me from not finishing the book but it was just not for me. My librarian will be disappointed!

[Werner · Rating 4 out of 5]

Note, Oct. 1, 2016: I just edited this review again to correct a minor typo.

Note, Nov. 28, 2014: I just edited this review slightly to make a factual correction --I recognized two of the names in the bibliography, not just one.

Full disclosure at the outset: I won a free copy of this book in a recent Goodreads giveaway.

Because of my liking for supernatural fiction and my interest in folklore, it's perhaps not surprising that I'm intrigued by unexplained phenomena in the real world, and have been since childhood. My own attitude is one of open-minded inquiry, tempered by caution and a critical faculty. While I don't "believe in ghosts" in the conventional sense, I also don't dogmatically assume that naive materialism explains all observed reality. I've never had any paranormal experiences of my own (I'm using "paranormal" as most people do, in the sense of uncanny or strange, with no connotations about the cause --not, as Clarke defines it at one point in this book, as a technical term that itself implies a non-supernatural explanation); but I have family members who have, and a neighbor whose veracity I have no reason to doubt, who fully believes that her house is harmlessly haunted by the ghost of a child. So my interest in Clarke's book was piqued when I saw the giveaway.

Roger Clarke grew up in the 1960s and 70s on England's Isle of Wight, an area with folk beliefs in ghosts, and lived in houses that had tales of hauntings connected to them. As a kid and teen, he developed an avid interest in ghost hunting, becoming the youngest member of the Society for Psychical Research at the age of 14. (The first chapter of the book provides this background, and discusses the several "haunted" sites he's visited personally.) While the bulk of the Goodreads description just reproduces the cover copy, which is a bit sensationalized, it does give a pretty accurate idea of the book's flavor. It's not really a systematic treatise on the subject, or a full history of ghost beliefs (it's organized topically, rather than chronologically), but it's a very wide-ranging discussion, with a lot of fascinating factual information. Clarke takes it as a given that some people do experience "ghost" phenomena; the question for him is not whether these exist or not, but rather how they should be explained, and what ghost beliefs tell us about ourselves. (And, at least in this book, he doesn't really attempt to suggest definitive answers.)

Though the book isn't really a "natural history" of ghosts, the second chapter does provide a "taxonomy" or classification (actually taken from ghost researcher Peter Underwood) of eight types of "ghostly" phenomena: "elementals," poltergeists, traditional or historical ghosts, mental imprint menifestations, crisis or death-survival apparitions, time slips, "ghosts" of the living, and haunted inanimate objects. Some of these categories, which are mostly distinguished by how they can possibly be explained, are concepts I was already aware of from other reading, but I still found the discussion informative. The succeeding chapters deal with a variety of subjects (which aren't always neatly organized), including 20th-century style ghost hunting, spiritualist seances, attempts to photograph ghosts, use of other kinds of technology for ghostly research, ghost phenomena associated with the military in wartime, and bogus ghost phenomena. Another interesting theme is the role of religion in European ghost belief. In the Middle Ages, the Roman Catholic church explained ghosts as souls from Purgatory; once souls were in heaven or hell, they stayed there. The Protestant rejection of Purgatory was associated with denial of the possibility of ghosts, and the explanation of all alleged ghostly phenomena as demonic in origin. (An exception was the early Methodist movement, which was open to the idea of ghosts due to the Wesley family's experience of poltergeist phenomena in Epworth in John Wesley's early years.) Much of this information was new to me or only vaguely grasped before. Several chapters concentrate on famous cases of "hauntings," including the 17th-century Tedworth Drummer, the phenomena at Hinton Ampner in the 18th century, the "Brown Lady of Raynham Hall," and the case of Borley Rectory in the 20th century.

For the most part, Clarke expresses no opinion, or ambiguous opinions, about the phenomena he describes, with the exception of some incidents, like the Cock Lane "ghost" in London in 1760-62, that were clearly faked. Based on the material here, I would say that there is a good deal of claimed "ghost" phenomena that can be discounted or that is susceptible of a natural explanation. There is, IMO, a core residue of data that is more resistant to that sort of explanation. This doesn't mean that we're obliged to explain it as the activity of revenant spirits of the dead, though I don't dogmatically deny that some of it could be. (I personally believe that the souls of the dead are normally unconscious and inactive until the time of the future resurrection; but that's a Biblical interpretation, not a proven fact, and what's normal may also not be invariable. I also don't rule out the reality of genuine demonic activity as an explanation for some phenomena; and I would recommend Kurt Koch's Between Christ and Satan as a worthwhile resource on that topic. But that's also not a handy-dandy explanation that all data can be forced to fit.)

One of the most fascinating aspects of the book to me was Clarke's highlighting of connections between supernatural fiction and real-life incidents. For instance, he makes a good case that the Hinton Ampner haunting suggested Henry James' The Turn of the Screw. Daniel Defoe's "True Relation of the Apparition of One Mrs. Veal" turns out to be an only lightly fictionalized account of an actual reported event; and famed ghost story writer M. R. James had a traumatizing paranormal experience as a boy.

Clarke isn't a scientist as such; he's an interested dabbler in the subject, writing for interested lay persons. His style is lively and chatty, but not ultra-scholarly, and his treatments of various facets of the subject are often not deep. He uses endnotes, but they're often just factual tidbits about a subject, not documentation of sources, and a lot of quoted and other material isn't documented. (The book is also indexed, but there are some omissions in the indexing.) Also, the editing was sometimes careless; information will occasionally be repeated because he apparently forgot he supplied it earlier. More than once, he left me wanting more information than I got. He did, however, clearly do his homework, and took it seriously. The bibliography for further reading fills about three-and-a-quarter pages, and consists of apparently solid sources, several of them from university presses. I haven't read any of these, and the only authors I recognized were folklorist Andrew Lang and Peter Haining (who edited The Mammoth Book of True Hauntings); but at least one is a book I'd like to read. Two valuable sources not included are William G. Roll's The Poltergeist, and True Irish Ghost Stories by St. John Seymour and Harry Neligan.

All in all, I enjoyed the book enough to feel it earned its fourth star. It's not the definitive exploration of its subject by any means. But if that exploration is ever written, this is one source its author will probably want to make use of!

[K.J. Charles]

An overview of mostly English hauntings and famous ghost stories, well placed in the cultural and social context. This includes looking at religion, gender, class, technology, and the fact that most of London in the 1700s was permanently shitfaced on gin. Doesn't have a super strong thesis, perhaps, but it's an interesting read with a few excellent insights and some great footnotes.

[nettebuecherkiste · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kaum jemand kann sich Grusel- und Geistergeschichten wirklich entziehen, selbst wer die Existenz des Übernatürlichen konsequent ablehnt, kennt sicher doch diesen angenehmen Schauer, der uns bei gruseligen Geschichten und Berichten über den Rücken läuft. Nicht umsonst ist die britische Reality-TV-Sendung „Most Haunted“ so beliebt, zumal in dem Land, Großbritannien nämlich, das wohl über die meisten Spukorte weltweit verfügt. Roger Clarke geht so weit, den Geisterglauben als eine Art Ersatzreligion im ansonsten immer stärker säkularisierten Westen, speziell Großbritannien, zu betrachten:

„Belief in the paranormal has become a form of decayed religion in secular times: ghosts are the ghosts of religion itself“. (Seite 291)

Dieser Satz lässt schon ahnen: Roger Clarke ist kein total abgehobener Freak, der seine Leser zum Übersinnlichen bekehren möchte. Vielmehr ist der Journalist seit seiner Jugend ein anerkannter Experte auf dem Gebiet der Geistererscheinungen, der uns mit dem vorliegenden Buch einen Überblick über deren Geschichte liefert, in den geschilderten Fällen kann er auch meistens gleich die Auflösung anbieten (was mancher Leser, durchaus auch ich, manchmal ein bisschen schade finden mag).

Gleich zu Beginn des Werks stellt Clarke dar, um was es in dem Buch nicht geht: um die Frage, ob Geister existieren. Es gibt zu viele belegte Fälle von Geistererscheinungen, um ihre Existenz gänzlich leugnen zu können. Clarke will vielmehr erklären, was hinter solchen Phänomenen steckt. Für diese nennt er einige Beispiele, dir mir wirklich haben die Haare zu Berge stehen lassen und mir eine schlaflose Nacht verschafft haben (ich bin da eventuell ein klitzekleines bisschen empfänglich…)

Das zweite Kapitel, „A Taxonomy of Ghosts“, fand ich ganz besonders interessant und hilfreich, liefert es doch eine genaue Klassifizierung der verschiedenen Geistererscheinungen. Es folgt ein Kapitel über verschiedene berühmte Geisterjäger im Verlauf der Geschichte. Die weiteren Kapitel behandeln einzelne berühmte Fälle von Heimsuchungen, beginnend mit einem klassischen Spukhaus im 18. Jahrhundert.

Ich muss sagen, dass ich diese Kapitel nicht mehr ganz so fesselnd fand wie die Eingangskapitel, was aber schlicht daran liegt, dass mich in diesem Fall ausnahmsweise weniger die Geschichte interessiert als heute existierende Spukvorkommnisse und heimgesuchte Plätze. Dennoch habe ich mich gerade aufgrund des sachlichen Vorgehens des Autors kaum getraut, das Buch im Bett zu lesen. Roger Clarke erscheint sowohl kundig als auch glaubhaft.

Wie bereits erwähnt konnten die meisten der besprochenen Fälle tatsächlich aufgelöst werden, was jedoch nicht bedeutet, dass Roger Clarke die Existenz von Geistern widerlegt. Ich interpretiere das Buch eher so, dass es solche Phänomene gibt und dass wir vielleicht einfach in vielen Fällen noch nicht entdeckt haben, was in wissenschaftlicher Hinsicht dahinter steckt. Im Verlauf der Geschichte gab es immer wieder Entdeckungen und Auflösungen für bis dahin Unerklärbares. Man stelle sich vor, wie ein Mensch aus dem Mittelalter oder aus noch früheren Zeiten auf einen Fernseher oder gar Computer reagieren würde. Eine sehr spannende Frage, wie ich finde, auch in psychologischer Hinsicht. Ein empfehlenswertes Buch.

[Trilby · Rating 5 out of 5]

If you're looking for the dime-a-dozen, sensational "tales of the supernatural" kind of book, you won't find it here. Instead, you will find something unique and much more interesting: a natural history of ghosts.

Over nearly four decades, I've collected scores of ghost stories. This scholarly, yet entertaining book is a wonderful examination of the tellers and tales of uncanny doings. I was captivated by the backgrounds to the most famous stories of the paranormal from Britain and America--and surprised at the number of well known historical figures involved, like John Wesley and Horace Walpole.

Clarke covers it all, from poltergeists to séances to ESP to ghost hunters--and more. He examines the hoaxes as well as the unexplained. My personal favorite was the story of a cursed German WW I U-boat--which Clarke calls "a mobile haunted house." I was fascinated by the tracing of the story upon which Henry James based "The Turn of the Screw," my favorite literary ghost story.

There are quite a few memorable quotes, but the one I like best is by Harry Price, the first ghost hunter: "People don't want the de-bunk, they want the bunk." Alas, one need look no further for proof of this statement than the current spate of paranormal TV shows, such as the laughable "Alaska Monsters". At least the gullible viewers of these shows are not as dangerous as the 18th century "flash mobs" of thousands that showed up, ready for action against the alleged ghost--even if it meant tearing down the allegedly haunted house. Now that's scary.

[Emma · Rating 2 out of 5]

It is jaw dropping how this author has shown exceptional skill in making such a diverse and fascinating subject into one that is shamefully dull. Bravo sir, you have provided me with some wonderful reading should I be suffering from a random bout of insomnia, your writing puts me to sleep in minutes. His research is commendable and the subject itself, fascinating, but the writing lacks any real emotion and leaves the overall experience feeling like a monotonous, uninspiring lecture. Needless to say I left it unfinished and have moved onto better, bigger things.....namely staring at walls and watching paint dry.

[Patrick · Rating 4 out of 5]

Enjoyed this very much. It manages to be a skeptical, reasoned survey of the history of hauntings in Britain while also being a personal expression of the author’s own abiding interest in the inexplicable. He gets the second part out of the way early on in the very first chapter when he describes poring for hours over a mysterious photograph of what was once considered the most haunted bedroom in England, describing how he would later go on to sleep there, ‘and was, I suppose, haunted’. That airy modifier is crucial, since like those involved with so many of the incidents in this book, he didn’t ever actually see the ghost. But does that make the experience any less real?

It’s a rather ponderous book, long on detail and digression, but short on conclusions about the nature or truth of ghosts in general. Most of the cases described are extremely compelling - and no less so for the fact that they are more often than not exposed as fakes – but the author isn’t particularly interested in offering any single overarching theory as to how or why we see or hear ghosts. Indeed, it frequently seems like there are as many reasons to encounter or to fake such encounters as there are motivations for any other aspect of unusual human nature: typical labels like ‘greed’, ‘loneliness’, ‘trauma’ hardly seem to cover it.

A staunch materialist might be put off by the author’s own dogged insistence that there is something worthwhile and enticing about the mysteries of these stories, but fortunately I have never been one to let my own doubts get in the way of a good yarn. I should confess that part of me desperately wanted one of these tales to be proved true, especially since the progress of the years in the book only seems to reveal an increasingly cynical view of what might be called the ‘ghost industry’ in this country. Wherever an individual can exploit the overactive imaginations of others for their own benefit, it seems they almost inevitably will – the key example here being Harry Price, the original ‘psychic researcher’ who pioneered the ghost hunt as live broadcast, only to be later discredited following his investigation into Borley Rectory.

What might be the most remarkable thing about this book is that it ends up being so critical that it almost destroys its own subject as paranormal (or should I say supernatural?) occurrence. An early chapter lays out in detail a ‘taxonomy of ghosts’ in all their varieties (‘Elementals, Poltergeists, Traditional or Historical ghosts, Mental Imprint Manifestations…’ etc) and this is fascinating, but these distinctions are rendered somewhat redundant when so many of the stories which follow are revealed to be of indistinct imaginative origin: pretty much all of what occurs turns out to be a sort of mish-mash of ‘all of the above’ in taxonomy terms. But again, if (like me) you don’t expect much in the way of consistency in an assessment of such an esoteric subject, you probably won’t be too put off by this. It's a very interesting book.

[Maya Panika · Rating 5 out of 5]

Roger Clarke has to be the most well-placed person to write a ‘natural history’ of ghosts. Haunted as a child, he became the youngest ever member of the Society for Psychical Research. The subject has been a matter of fascination for him ever since, and he has remained a keen investigator to this day. A Natural History of Ghosts gives detailed accounts of famous hauntings. They range from ancient ghost stories, through the Victorian passion for séances, to the modern ghost investigation – which is not new at all, but began with famous faker Harry Price, who pioneered the live ghost hunt on radio in the 1920s – coming bang up to date with TAPS, Most Haunted and Ghost Adventures. An attempted taxonomy details different kinds of ghosts: the ‘stone-tape’ type, doomed to go through the motions over and over and over again, who seem to be mere recordings in time. And the far more chilling kind, who speak and interact, intelligently, with the living and their fellow dead, like the – still unexplained - Enfield poltergeist.

Clarke tries his hardest to maintain a dry and sceptical look at hauntings, ancient and modern, but cannot help observing that ghosts are certainly real; ghosts have been and continue to be experienced and documented across time and space, and the only debate is, what are they, really? Are they all figments of the imagination or out and out fakes? The actual spirits of the dead? Or a phenomenon that is, as yet, unexplained? Sadly, Roger Clarke has no answers, and provides no conclusions, either, he simply delivers pure information with which we must make up our own minds. As the sceptical George Bernard Shaw told Henry James that, "No man who doesn't believe in a ghost ever sees one." Maybe the truth is the other way around? That those who believe in ghosts, do so precisely because they have seen one.

Roger Clarke keeps his account objective, distancing himself personally, from what he is documenting. Personally, I would have enjoyed a wee bit more personal input and opinion from a man who, above almost all other authors, is best placed to give an informed opinion. Perhaps the most surprising thing about this book is that it is never in the least bit dry. Roger Clarke is a natural writer and story teller. This is a smooth, easy, fascinating read to anyone with the slightest interest in the subject, and very highly recommended indeed.

[Christoph Fischer · Rating 3 out of 5]

"A Natural History of Ghosts: 500 Years of Hunting for Proof" by Roger Clarke was maybe a case of wrong expectations but I was a little disappointed by this book. It provided interesting insights into the history of ghost hunting and a selection of good stories but for me it did not come together properly and left me wanting more of a conclusion or round up.

[Namera [The Literary Invertebrate] · Rating 3 out of 5]

⤅ Nonfiction Book of the Month: August 2025

To be honest, I kind of thought a book on 500 years of ghost hunting would be a bit more... interesting.

This book reads very much as though someone rang up the author one day and said "Do you want to write about ghosts? Anything about them, it doesn't matter what. Just hit 300 pages or so!" To which Clarke, like any sane person, agreed, but never felt like it was his responsibility to develop any sort of narrative plan either.

The result is a few hundred pages that undeniably discuss ghosts, and various historical incidents to do with ghosts, but it's hard to think of anything else that connects the contents. Each chapter is basically a standalone and not all of them are even about 'searching for proof', as such. Clarke just thought they'd make an interesting read. He wasn't wrong, but I was glad when the book was finished.

[Chronics · Rating 2 out of 5]

Note this book is not scary, its literally a history of english ghost stories, with the occasional european or american story added. I was quite dissapointed, the author seems to just go on and on for the sake of it, he also seems to imply that all the stories are fake, at least the ones he writes about but will then end the chapter with a question, as if to say "or is it"? Would have prepared more genuine story telling rather than just his commentary, followed by an analysis of the story which without the authors blatant views on whether it fake or real.

[Icy Sedgwick · Rating 4 out of 5]

The title of this book is a little of a misnomer; it’s not a natural history of ghosts at all. Rather, it’s a natural history of the ghost story. Roger Clarke investigates a whole range of stories, from now-demolished ancestral homes to the famous Cock Lane ghost. In so doing, he explores the beliefs about ghosts apparent at that time.

It’s fascinating to see how the belief in ghosts has changed over time. And Clarke has done a good job of rounding together a range of stories that aren’t the usual suspects that appear in collections like this. While I don’t think he has in any way found “proof” that ghosts exist, he has found proof that belief does…and in spades. It’s an enjoyable read, perfect for anyone with an interest in the supernatural.

[Christine · Rating 4 out of 5]

I finished this book, and I was left with a question.
How do you keep live sparrows in your anus? Inquiring minds want to know.
That aside, this is a rather interesting look at the use of ghosts in English memory, landscape, fiction, and folklore. There are connections made to literature (including Robert Browning’s poetry) as well as how the view of ghosts reflects on class warfare in England. Interesting.
But I am really wondering about those sparrows.

[Connie · Rating 3 out of 5]

I own this book.

If I'm being blatantly honest, I don't really know what I thought of this book. This book charts different historical accounts of the paranormal. Ghost stories littered throughout the past 500 years, looking at hauntings, apparitions, poltergeists and so on. It was interesting to see that modern day ghost stories aren't all that modern and actually span back hundreds of years. Roger Clarke's account of these stories is interesting, he is clearly an author who knows his field well and provides a robust account of these stories. But it didn't enthral me. I found myself having to put the book down at various stages and it didn't grip me as much as I suspected it would originally.

[Jayaprakash Satyamurthy · Rating 5 out of 5]

An immensely enjoyable, informative and non-dogmatic history of 500 years of ghostly encounters, mainly in the UK. Highly recommended to anyone interested in the study of our beliefs and attitudes to the paranormal, rather than a judgement on the reality of these phenomena themselves, although Clarke does always leave a little room for the possibility of ghosts existing independent of our beliefs, errors, deceptions and delusions. I don't think there's been such a meticulous study of this kind of topic in a long time.

[Riju Ganguly · Rating 3 out of 5]

This book is not exactly about 'Ghost-hunting', or even 'Ghosts'. It’s concerned with two things, which are:
1. Why does the English (Oh yeah, this book has nothing to do with the belief in supernatural in other parts of the world) believe in ghosts.
2. How does this belief manifest through various forms and rituals.
It contains a few fascinating stories, but is mostly pedantic. But it’s undoubtedly thorough.

[Anne Billson · Rating 5 out of 5]

Excellent, impeccably researched account of ghost-hunting through the ages; scholarly without being turgid; entertaining without ever insulting the reader's intelligence. Describes Britain's most famous hauntings in a clear-headed way that neverthless sometimes gave me goose-bumps if I was reading late at night - and I don't even believe in ghosts. Should appeal to believers and sceptics alike.

[Nancy Oakes · Rating 4 out of 5]

Much more to come about this book when I have several free moments. For now, unlike many people, I didn't find this book boring at all.

[RavensScar · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rtc

[Andi · Rating 1 out of 5]

With a title like "Ghosts: A Natural History" I was expecting something more cohesive, with a throughgoing historical narrative and perhaps a methodical tracing of historical societal trends affecting or affected by supernatural beliefs or events. Some parts of this book seemed to be trying for that, sort of, but the final product is just kind of all over the place.

The first two chapters consist of a personal introduction wherein the author describes his own experiences with alleged hauntings, thus explaining his interest and motivation for writing the book, and then a taxonomy of different types of ghosts, which would seem like a setup for how the rest of the book will be structured, but it's not; it is, in fact, almost never referred to again. The remaining chapters describe various alleged supernatural events, arranged in (very loose) chronological order, from the 17th to the mid-20th century. It should also be noted, the focus of the book is almost exclusively British; I didn't mind that, but it would have been nice to know going in (especially since the cover copy explicitly mentions American figures like Ben Franklin -- he only actually shows up in a couple end notes.)

The early chapters reminded me very strongly of those little paperback collections of "true" ghost stories I used to get as a kid from school book fairs (and in fact I actually remember reading about a couple of the hauntings mentioned here in those books), where a single haunting is described from beginning to end, but this discrete style is abandoned in later chapters for briefly describing several examples of thematically (loosely) connected incidents. The tone in discussing the older episodes seems curiously credulous, even when describing events the author later explicitly calls out as hoaxes, while some of the later chapters come off almost as a dedicated skeptical takedown, with only laughably weak "but maybe" lines left for doubters*. The overall writing style is rambling and unfocused, with some chapters seeming to forget where they started by the end. The end notes are an utter mess; a few of them are actual, important information that should have been included in the body of the text, some are interesting asides for the curious, and several are completely irrelevant non-sequiturs that should have been left out entirely.

And speaking of non-sequiturs, the sheer number of times this guy points out obviously benign and even expected coincidences like they're something eerie or significant is maddening. This happens with several details, but it's especially glaring when, for example, he's pointing out family connections among the British aristocracy. They're ALL related to each other! It is not significant that Lady So-and-So who saw this ghost is the great niece's stepbrother's third cousin twice removed of Lord What's-His-Name who saw this other ghost a hundred years before. That's just what happens when you have a small, insular group of people who all keep marrying each other for hundreds of years.

Overall, I wanted to like this book. I was looking for an actual history, but even if it had just been a competently edited collection of "true" ghost stories, I probably would have been decently satisfied. But it couldn't decide what it wanted to be, and it ended up just a boring, jumbled mess.


*For the record, I'm a skeptic, so I'm not necessarily saying he's being unfair, but it is a notably inconsistent tone.

[Steve Duffy · Rating 4 out of 5]

"Natural history", according to one popular definition, "is the research and study of organisms... in their environment, leaning more towards observational than experimental methods of study." That's pretty much exactly what Roger Clarke gives us in this entertaining overview of Britain's best-known hauntings over the last few hundred years, from the poltergeists of Tedworth House to Sky Living's "Most Haunted" TV show. Like M.R. James before him, Clarke understands the importance of setting in all the best ghost stories, and one of the many pleasures to be had from this book is its success in establishing the relationships between the revenants and the spaces they inhabit. The sociological and historical context of these events is succinctly and clearly established by the author, and is often illuminating; however, this illumination doesn't necessarily mean that all the Gothic shadows are banished. The more impressionistic elements of the stories - the intangibles, the sensations, the reactions of the participants, the little details that probably won't ever be explained away - are given their due prominence in Clarke's carefully measured accounts. The function of the ghost story is, after all, to reach those parts that other narratives can't reach.

[Brandi · Rating 4 out of 5]

Roger Clarke's "Ghosts: A Natural History: 500 Years of Searching for Proof" was not quite what I hoped it would be. When I first got the book, I became hopeful, especially when I read the summary and realized the tales were from England. Once I started reading, though, I realized it wasn't quite what I hoped for. Whereas there is a lot of interesting information presented in the book, it didn't flow too well. It seems like the author would be referring to an event that occurred in the 1200's, jump to the 1900's, go back to the 1400's and so on. It wasn't quite as organized as I would have liked. Also many of the stories, especially towards the beginning of the book, that I found most interesting, were never elaborated on. It's almost like he wanted to cram in so many stories that he didn't thoroughly go into detail over many of the more interesting ones.
Overall, though, there was a lot of interesting information and stories presented in the book and I did enjoy the author's narration style. I would probably read another one of his books were I to encounter one. In spite of it's flaws, it is a book that many fans of the paranormal would probably enjoy.
This book was won from the Goodreads.com website in exchange for a review.

[Alasdair · Rating 2 out of 5]

The title and the first few introductory chapters are pretty promising, suggesting that we're going to get a look at the historical and social context of the idea of ghosts/ghost stories/hauntings etc. but the rest of the book really fails to deliver. Most of the chapters are either a recounting of the evidence for a specific incident with fairly token contextualisation or analysis, or a scattershot retelling of several stories on a given theme with similarly minimal exploration of why they are important or interesting.

It sometimes feels like you're stuck in a pub with somebody very knowledgeably unloading everything they know about a topic they've clearly done a lot of research into, but never stopping to explain why any of it might matter.

If you just want some retellings of ghost narratives, it does a serviceable job, but otherwise I couldn't really recommend.

[Boorrito · Rating 2 out of 5]

This could have done with a better editor - there's a couple of footnotes that aren't in the right place, some weird typing errors and it would have made sense to organise by chronology, considering Clarke doesn't manage to organise by theme.

Also, it'd be really easy to fake a "ghost" in a spellchecker if you knew how to modify the dictionary file in Word and I'm surprised that Clarke considers it a weird unexpected mystery instead. Then again Clarke really, really wants to believe.

Conclusion: I didn't change my view from reading this, I went in thinking it's inconclusive if ghosts exist, but anyone who claims to be able to summon them at will is a liar and fraud.

[Berna Labourdette · Rating 4 out of 5]

Un ensayo MUY entretenido y lleno de información interesante sobre los fantasmas, el espiritismo y cómo evolucionaron los llamados "cazadores de fantasmas", todo relacionado con la literatura de terror y el folklore. Destaco especialmente la detallada mención a los hechos que influyeron a Henry James a escribir "Otra vuelta de tuerca" (que dan muchas luces sobre el argumento de la novela) y el aporte de Daniel Defoe, MR James, Arthur Machen y otros escritores al folklore fantasmal con sus cuentos, que terminaron siendo tomados por verídicos. MUY bueno. 

[Nick Davies · Rating 3 out of 5]

Alas this disappointed me somewhat. As a child and teenager I liked reading about ghosts - both ghost stories and non-fiction (Usborne books and Harry Price's documentation of investigations at Borley Rectory particularly memorable) - so picked this up on a whim. It seems the author has a similar interest and hence I can appreciate the reasons for this undertaking.

Regrettably it was too 'history' for me. My fault partly for having expectations from the title but I think I expected something a little more investigative and analytical. What this book actually delivers is a well-researched discussion of many key events going back hundreds of years, and what was recorded about them. There's plenty there, but it was all a bit turgid for me - simply detailing what person A reported in a letter to person B about what person C said happened at place D.. it didn't hold my interest. Latter chapters were better, but the first half of the book was tough going. Though I did learn a few interesting bits and bobs, the delivery was a bit stodgy for me.

I also started to get profoundly irritated with the author pointing out that so-and-so who was reportedly connected to or interested in each haunting, was a relative of someone famous. I don't give a shit if a certain seance was attended by the great aunt of Alice Liddell (of Alice in Wonderland), or if someone's brother in law was the grandfather of the foreign secretary - this really adds f*ck all to the subject of ghosts.

[Alexander Páez · Rating 4 out of 5]

Me lo he gozado muchísimo. Es un ensayo enfocadísimo en casas encantadas de Reino Unido, y apenas (por no decir que nada) trata fantasmas de otros países. Pero vaya, que si os interesan los personajazos del mundo paranormal, historias de casas encantadas y lugares malditos de UK... dadle caña. Muy recomendable.

[Jo · Rating 3 out of 5]

This is a look at various ghosts and hauntings and the people who believe in them covering half a millennia. I like that Clarke doesn't automatically believe or disbelieve the tales, just assesses them for the evidence and the belief system of people at that time. It's an unbiased look at the supernatural world and those that are connected with trying to find out more.

[Ross Maclean · Rating 4 out of 5]

Comes at the whole subject of ghosts from the fascinating angle of a social phenomenon. Witty and engaging, it treats the subject with due reverence but a lightness of touch. At its best — for me — when incorporating more personal reflections but pleasingly selective and askance in its choices of what to cover.

[Carole Tyrrell · Rating 4 out of 5]

I finished this book with a real feeling of regret as I was enjoying it so much. The author, the youngest person ever to be invited to join the Ghost Society. He grew up in 2 hauinted hosues but never experienced anything untoward despite wanting to. I heard Roger Clarke talking about this book on Radio 4 and couldn’t believe my luck when I found it in my local library.
He begins by asking the interesting question ‘Why do ghosts wear clothes?’ And when you think about it, yes why do they? Surely they should be in shrouds, bedsheets or even au naturel. But most observers see them in dark clothes or grey outfits or maybe they just assume they’re in the clothes of the day. Although Clarke discusses well known and documented supernatural tales such as the Tidworth drummer, the Hinton Ampner hauntings and the Wesley family’s experiences at Emsworth this is not just a book of ghost stories related without comment. After all, as ghost hunter par excellence, Harry Price, said ‘ People don’t want the debunk, they want the bunk.’
Instead he puts them into a social and historical context and reveals surprising facets. For example, the Hinton Ampner haunting may have inspired Quint in Henry James’ ‘The Turn of the Screw’. Isaac Mackrell, an ambitious and suspected dishonest manservant who was seen staring in at a window and whose last resting place remains unknown. I was also unaware of how much John Wesley’s experiences of the haunting at Emsworth whilst growing up encourage him to make the supernatural a basic tenet of Methodism until he was persuaded to water it down. Samuel Wesley, his father, was detested by his flock and one wonders what it must have been like growing up in that household especially as the ghost manifested itself during times of family tensions unsurprisingly.
Clarke also discusses the well know tales of the two ladies at Versailles, Mrs Veal and the Brown Lady of Raynham Hall. He also exposes the Cock Lane Ghost which has its echoes in TV programmes like Most Haunted Live in which the supernatural appears on cue. He also delves into supernatural literature and asserts that Sheridan Le Fanu was Ireland’s Edgar Allan Poe as they shared certain similarities. I did see a Dolores Le Fanu exhibiting in a smart London gallery and wondered if she was a distant relative. MR James is also mentioned in the probably location of Wailing Well which may be Worborrow Bay. This is now an MOD firing range and unwitting people have been shot there. He also thinks that Professor Parkin was a poor Latin scholar in that he didn’t correctly translate the inscription on the whistle. Along the way there’s also a chapter on the Angel of Mons, séances, table rapping and ectoplasm and Houdini’s message from beyond the grave. Ted Serios, a man who specialised in thoughtography which was the ability to project images from his mind into photos , and which he later lost is also briefly discussed although his Serios abilities remain unproven. An interesting and entertaining book which I really enjoyed. However, I resisted amazon’s invitation to click inside as who knew what might be waiting to greet me?