Illusion

In 1829, Eusèbe Salverte published an essay on magic, in which he attempted to find a universal explanation for all supposed magical acts. ¹ Writing in an age in which technology was just beginning to transform human life, Salverte looked to science as a key to understanding magic. The marvels attributed to magicians, he argued, were nothing other than the exploits of scientists, misunderstood by an ignorant populace. And where such an explanation did not seem plausible, Salverte suggested that ancient “magicians” had learned to harness the powers of lenses and mirrors in order deliberately to mislead the gullible. Sir Walter Scott, in his Letters on Demonology and Witchcraft the following year, proposed similar arguments, though with less of a technological bent; and, in 1832, David Brewster wrote in response to Scott a series of Letters on Natural Magic, in which he introduced English readers to the details of Salverte’s arguments. All three works enjoyed great popularity into the early twentieth century. Their influence can be seen not only in contemporary accounts of magic but also in Victorian publications on stage magic and “phantasmagoria,” which presupposed a continuity between ancient and medieval magic, and nineteenth-century special visual effects. ²