Well has it been said, romance of absolute is oftentimes less wonderful, and less startling to our previous expectations than romance of real human life (9:359) With this observation Thomas De Quincey opened his essay on Magnetism, published in Tait's Magazine, January, 1834. (1) Although it might sound like a variation on Lord Byron's declaration in Don Juan Truth is always strange;/Stranger than fiction (DJ Canto 14, st. 101), De Quincey meant something more. He went on to say that resources of mere physical nature are more ample, and more effective in production of marvelous, than imaginary world of magic or oriental enchantment. As evident in his childhood recollection of tales of Arabian Nights (10:387-388), De Quincey was especially found of the imaginary world of magic or oriental enchantment. What then could more wonderful, startling, and marvelous? Not fictions but facts--facts gleaned from powers and energies of natural world were previously unknown and unsuspected. De Quincey invited his readers to imagine sense of awe and mystery mariners of 12th century must have felt when magnetic compass, a Chinese invention, was first brought aboard a European ship: Never was any natural agent discovered which wore so much appearance of a magical device; nor even, to this day, has science succeeded in divesting of mystery sympathy with an unknown object, which constitutes its power. It is still a mighty talisman; and differing from talismans of superstition only thus far,--that it obeys a power acting by fixed laws, and in harmony with other powers composing system of nature. (9:359) When Franz Anton Mesmer introduced into medical practice a treatment induced a trance-like state, he presented a theory to explain how his treatment worked, a theory based on effects of magnet. Because this analogous power affected the system of man, he called it animal magnetism. De Quincey's essay provides a summary of Mesmer's career and his influence on succeeding generation of medical doctors. His topic, however, is not simply an historical retrospect. It responded to contemporary uproar over second report on Animal Magnetism by French Royal Academy issued in Paris in 1831. The first report of 1784, half a century earlier, had denounced Mesmer and his magnetic practice as quackery. In second report, Mesmer is vindicated with extensive documentation on how trance is induced and case studies on how patients responded. De Quincey's essay is a detailed review of Dr. John Campbell Colquohuon's English translation of second Paris report. (2) De Quincey celebrated vindication without recognizing battle was far from over, second Paris report of 1831 would be followed by a third report of 1837, and even then debate would continue with periodic bursts of intensity through century. In an extraordinary volume entitled Extraordinary Popular Delusions and The Madness Of Crowds (1841), Charles MacKay included--alongside chapters on Alchymists, FortuneTelling, and Witch Mania--a chapter on Magnetisers. Although he wittily exposed delusions of both practitioners and their patients, he was also shrewd enough to suspend final judgment in his closing paragraph: Here we conclude subject, as it would serve no good purpose to extend to greater length history of Animal Magnetism; especially at a time when many phenomena, reality of which it is impossible to dispute, are daily occurring to startle and perplex most learned, impartial, and truthloving of mankind. Enough, however, has been stated to shew, if there be some truth in magnetism, there has been much error, misconception, and exaggeration. …