Nestled in the South Devon countryside, hidden from view down narrow country lanes, stand the imposing ruins of Berry Pomeroy Castle.  Not only is this a captivating historical site, but it is also an infamous hotspot for reported paranormal activity.  Most famous among the various inhabitant ghosts is the White Lady, believed to be the spirit of Margaret Pomeroy, who was imprisoned and starved to death by her sister Eleanor, and the Blue Lady, believed to be the teenage daughter of a Norman Lord who, after falling pregnant as a result of abuse by her father, strangled the baby to death in one of the upper rooms and her anguished phantom has been reported by visitors to the castle, luring them to unsafe spots in the ruins.

By delving into the past events of a location, investigators often hope to uncover clues that might explain current paranormal claims. However, this approach is not without its pitfalls. Could there be hidden dangers that, if overlooked, might impede an investigation? This blog post explores the significance of historical research, weighing its benefits against its potential drawbacks.

Why is Historical Research Important?

Historical research in paranormal investigations typically involves searching through past records, events, and anecdotes to understand the possible causes of paranormal claims. The goals of historical research can be summarised as follows:

Providing Context

Researching a location’s past often provides invaluable context to paranormal claims. For example, if people believe a house is haunted, learning about previous occupants, events, or documented tragedies might shed light on the reason for the reported phenomena. Understanding the history of a location can help an investigator form a narrative that either supports or refutes the claims being examined.

Identifying Patterns

If we define a haunting as a series of unusual or unexplained events occurring in a location over time, researching the history can help us understand whether there are any patterns to the reported phenomena. Understanding these patterns can strengthen the case for genuine paranormal activity or lead the investigator closer to understanding whether natural causes can explain the activity.

Corroborating Evidence

Sometimes, paranormal claims around a given location go back many years, long before the current occupants arrived. Past eyewitness accounts, old news reports, and archive materials can help us understand whether phenomena are new developments or have historical precedents. This is especially true if a building’s current occupants report experiences similar to previous reports without any prior knowledge of them.

Enhanced Credibility

Presenting findings of an investigation in the context of verified history can enhance the credibility of an investigator’s work. It demonstrates the investigator’s commitment to understanding the full picture of the location and can make any conclusions presented that much more persuasive.

What About the Drawbacks?

Despite the benefits listed above, relying too heavily on historical research in investigations can also have its downsides.

Introducing Bias

Knowing a location’s history can lead to bias in paranormal investigations. Investigators might unintentionally look for evidence that fits a preconceived historical narrative, ignoring information that doesn’t support their expectations. This confirmation bias can skew results and lead to inaccurate conclusions. For example, if a location is known for having the death of a child associated with it, investigators may frame their investigation around the assumption that any inhabiting spirit is that of the child. They might structure call-out sessions or select trigger objects based on this assumption, disregarding anything that contradicts this narrative.

Similarly, learning about traumatic events in a location’s history can emotionally affect investigators. This emotional impact can influence how they perceive and interpret their own experiences during the investigation. For example, knowing about a murder or fatal accident in a house might make investigators more likely to believe they are encountering the spirit of the deceased victim, even if the evidence is inconclusive.

Overemphasis on Anecdotal Evidence

Historical research often relies on anecdotal evidence, which can be subjective and unreliable. Personal accounts passed down through generations may be embellished, misremembered, or mixed up with other unrelated stories. This can distort the facts of the case. Relying too much on these accounts can undermine an investigation’s findings, especially if further research reveals contradictory information.

Verifying historical records can be extremely challenging. Records are often incomplete, inconsistent, full of errors, or completely missing. This can create gaps or mistakes in the historical narrative. Relying too much on these incomplete records can lead to inaccurate conclusions that are hard to correct.

Allowing Modern, Unproven Techniques to Lead Historical Research

Many modern paranormal investigators rely on unproven technology such as spirit boxes, phone apps, and word generators, in conjunction with techniques such as the Estes Method, to produce information such as names and dates that they consider relevant to the investigation. If taken literally, this information can construct potentially false narratives that can lead historical research down a rabbit hole, resulting in frustrating dead-ends if the leads gained through such techniques fail to bear fruit.

Assuming History is Relevant

While the traditional view of hauntings is that spirits of the dead cause them, there is a reasonable case to say that this belief is a holdover from old superstitious beliefs, which often go unchallenged, especially among believers. It is possible, perhaps even likely, that activity encountered during cases of hauntings has nothing to do with spirits or the afterlife, which would render aspects of historical research somewhat irrelevant.

Getting the Balance Right

To effectively utilise historical research, we must strike a balance between understanding the past and not necessarily allowing it to dictate present-day conclusions.

Researchers should cross-reference historical records across multiple sources and not rely on just one. By comparing different accounts and records, researchers can identify commonalities or discrepancies to build a more accurate representation of the history of a site. It is important to maintain objectivity and avoid making assumptions about the phenomena recorded based on historical records. Likewise, investigators should be careful not to allow information obtained through “modern-day” techniques like the Estes Method to unduly direct research, as there is the risk that the historical research can also be biased by information obtained during the course of the investigation.

Investigating a haunting is best done as objectively as possible and should only seek to determine the validity of the paranormal claims. Ideally, researchers should conduct historical research impartially and as objectively as possible, separate from the site investigation (preferably by a separate team). An attempt to corroborate findings between the investigation and research phases should only be done during the concluding stages of the investigation.

Conclusion

Historical research can play an important role in paranormal investigation by providing context to claims and allowing for the identification of patterns that might link current reports to past events. However, it is crucial to recognise the significant drawbacks associated with this approach. Paranormal investigators should strive to remain objective and avoid letting assumptions about the nature of hauntings lead to bias. By balancing historical research with a critical and impartial perspective, investigators can enhance the credibility and accuracy of their findings.