THE POWER OF A MUSICAL INSTRUMENT: Franklin, the Mozarts

History of Psychology
2000, Vol. 3, No. 4, 326-343
Copyright 2000 by the Educational Publishing Foundation
1093-4510/00/$5.00 DOI: 10.1037//1093-4510.3.4.326
THE POWER OF A MUSICAL INSTRUMENT:
Franklin, the Mozarts, Mesmer, and the Glass Armonica
D a v i d A. Gallo and Stanley Finger
Washington University
In 1761 Benjamin Franklin invented the armonica (often referred to as the glass
harmonica), an instrument designed to simplify the playing of the musical glasses.
The instrument immediately became popular and inspired compositions by Wolfgang Mozart, who had the opportunity to hear and play one at the house of Franz
Anton Mesmer. Armonica music was used by Mesmer in his srances, because he
felt it could promote healing by propagating a mystical fluid that he called animal
magnetism through the body. After Mesmer's theories were debunked by a highly
respected panel of scientists, the armonica fell out of vogue. Because Franklin was
on the panel that examined and discredited mesmerism, he indirectly contributed to
his own invention's demise.
The glass armonica is a musical instrument that was invented by Benjamin
Franklin and inspired great composers, including Mozart and Beethoven. Like
other musical glasses before it, the alluring sounds of the armonica have been said
to affect some listeners psychologically. In this article we examine the history of
this mysterious instrument, emphasizing its supposed psychological powers and
especially its relevance to Franz Anton Mesmer's animal magnetism and psychology. We begin by providing a brief history of the musical glasses, including
how Franklin came to invent the armonica, and then turn to how Mesmer
incorporated it into his "medical" practice. We then discuss the historical confrontation between Franklin's scientific skepticism and Mesmer's philosophy,
developments that contributed to the demise of the armonica's popularity.
The First M u s i c a l Glasses
Most children know that glasses or jars of various sizes or filled with various
amounts of liquid can create different pitched notes when struck with a hard
object. The earliest records of tapping different cups or glasses to make musical
sounds can be traced back to Persia and China, where such instruments were
David A. Gallo and Stanley Finger, Department of Psychology, Washington University.
Stanley Finger is a historian of neuroscience, author of Origins of Neuroscience and Minds
Behind the Brain, senior editor of Journal of the History of the Neurosciences, and the first president
of the International Society for the History of the Neurosciences. He is Professor of Psychology at
Washington University.
David A. Gallo is a doctoral student in experimental psychology at Washington University. His
research interests are in cognitive psychology, with a focus on human memory.
This research was supported by a faculty research grant from Washington University to Stanley
Finger. We thank Russell Johnson of the University of California, Los Angeles, for his thoughtful
comments on preliminary drafts of this article.
Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to David A. Gallo, Department of
Psychology, Washington University, Campus Box 1125, One Brookings Drive, St. Louis, Missouri
63130-4899. Electronic mail may be sent to [email protected].
326
GLASS ARMONICA
327
played by the 13th century, if not before (see King, 1946, for a history of glass
instruments).
The first European reference to musical glasses can be found in Franchino
Gaffurio's (1451-1522) Theorica Musice, which was published in Milan in 1492.
This work contains a woodcut of one individual tapping glasses filled with
different amounts of liquid while another matches the sounds by tapping bells of
different sizes, as part of an alleged Pythagorean experiment (see Figure 1; King,
Figure 1. Woodcut of an alleged Pythagorean experiment involving musical
glasses and bells. From Gaffurio's (1492) Theorica Musice.
328
GALLO AND FINGER
1946, 1995). Music played a central role in Pythagorean ideals and was thought
to be able to restore balance to the soul of the ailing listener (e.g., Koestler, 1959,
p. 29).
The use of these glasses as a concert instrument became popular in the 1700s.
Numerous 18th-century references can be found to an instrument called the
verrillon (see Figure 2), which consisted of a table upon which rested many
drinking glasses filled with different amounts of liquids. The player stood at one
end of the table and struck the different glasses with a stick to elicit different
notes. The verrillon was sometimes accompanied by other instruments (often
violins and basses).
The verrillon had the disadvantages of being cumbersome and difficult to
tune, and the notes resulting from tapping its glasses could not be sustained. By
the time of its appearance, of course, it was already known that rubbing the rim
of a glass with a moistened finger could elicit a more sustained note. Playing a
glass by rubbing uses the same "stick-slip process" to cause vibration as does
drawing a bow across the string of a violin, although the resulting waveforms
differ considerably between the two instruments (Rossing, 1994; see also Meyer
& Allen, 1988). The resulting sound is perceived as a single dominant pitch
accompanied by quieter tones, which give it an eerie or celestial quality, quite
unlike that of any other instrument.
It has long been thought that the music created by playing drinking glasses
can have physiological, medicinal, and psychological effects on the listener. 1 For
instance, in G. P. Hasdorfer's Deliciae physicomathematicae, which was published in Niirnberg, Germany, in 1677, King (1946) found that:
(There is) an account of an experiment with four glasses, filled with brandy, wine,
water and salt water or oil. The diverse sounds produced by the contrasting content
of the glasses were thought not only to correspond to the emotions aroused by the
four "humours" of the human body, but even to have the power of alleviating or
curing such disorders as a thickness of the blood. (p. 99)
Another early account of the remarkable effects of musical glasses appears in
a story from the life of Richard Pockrich (c. 1690-1759; sometimes spelled
Puckridge or Puckeridge), a free-spirited Irish brewer, inventor, adventurer, and
musician. 2 From 1741 to the end of his life, Pockrich made money performing
music on his "angelick organ." His instrument was essentially a verrillon. Although Pockrich first played his glasses by tapping them, he later became skillful
at rubbing his moistened finger around their rims. One story about Pockrich and
the power of his music goes as follows:
Mr. Pockrich, in his brewery near Island-bridge, happening one day to be seized
by bailiffs, thus addressed them: "Gentleman, I am your prisoner, but before I do
myself the honour to attend you, give me leave as an humble performer of musick,
to entertain you with a tune." "Sir," replies one of the bailiffs, "we come here to
1 The proposed psychological effects of music, in general, have a long history, and music as a
therapeutic tool has become increasingly popular in modem psychology (see Heller, 1987, and
Davis, 1987, for histories of music therapy in America).
2 Among Pockrich's "wild" ideas was giving blood transfusions as a means of rejuvenating the
aged and building unsinkable boats for the navy. He twice ran for Parliament but was never elected.
GLASS ARMONICA
329
Figure 2. Sketch of a man playing a verrillon consisting of 18 glasses arranged in
a row on a table. From Eisel's (1738) Musicus.
execute our warrant, not to hear tunes." "Gentleman," says the Captain, "I submit
to your authority, but in the interim, while you are only taking a dram." "Here
Jack," calling to his servant, "bring a bottle of the Ros Solis I lately distill'd: I say,
Gentleman, before you take a dram, I shall dispatch my tune." In the meantime, he
flourishes a prelude on the glasses, and afterwards displays his skill thro' all the
pleasing turns and variations of the Black Joke. The monsters, charm'd with the
magic of his sounds, for some time stand at gaze. At length, recovering their
trance, thus accost the Captain: "Sir, upon your parole of honour to keep the secret,
we give you your liberty. 'Tis well, playing upon the glasses is not more common:
if it were, I believe our trade would find little employment." (Newburgh, 1759,
p. 241)
This tale demonstrates the spreading belief that musical glasses can have
strange physiological and psychological influences on the listener. In a way,
Pockrich's ability to induce a trancelike state with his music can be thought o f as
a precursor to Franz Anton M e s m e r ' s ( 1 7 3 4 - 1 8 1 5 ) use o f musical glasses in his
stances, to which we later return.
Following Pockrich's lead, performers playing musical glasses appeared
throughout Europe. In 1746 the young, and soon to be famous, composer Christoph Willibald Gluck ( 1 7 1 4 - 1 7 8 7 ) gave a concert in L o n d o n in which he played
26 glasses "tuned with spring water, accompanied with the whole band, being a
new instrument of his own invention, upon which he performs whatever may be
done on a violin or harpsichord" (Rossing, 1994, p. 1106).
Fifteen years later, Ann Ford (1737-1824), one o f the leading performers on
the musical glasses, published her now-rare Instructions f o r Playing on the
Musical Glasses: So That Any Person, Who Has the Least Knowledge of Music,
or a Good Ear, May Be Able to Perform in a Few Days, I f Not in a Few Hours.
Her pamphlet from 1761 can be viewed as a testament to the instrument's growing
popularity, especially in cities like London. In the same year, and perhaps even
more telling, Oliver Goldsmith (c. 1 7 3 0 - 1 7 7 4 ) wrote in his Vicar of Wakefield
330
GALLO AND FINGER
that listening to musical glasses had b e c o m e a fashionable pastime for the
wealthy.
Another early performer o f musical glasses was Edward Hussey Delaval
( 1 7 2 9 - 1 8 1 4 ) . H e hailed from an old Northumberland family and was a chemist,
electrician, and Fellow at the University o f Cambridge. He had the most complete
set o f musical glasses at the time, and Benjamin Franklin ( 1 7 0 6 - 1 7 9 0 ) thought so
highly o f him that he nominated him for membership in the Royal Society o f
L o n d o n in 1759, shortly after he himself had b e c o m e a member. 3
Franklin's Armonica
In a letter dated July 13, 1762, to his Italian friend Giambatista Beccaria
( 1 7 1 6 - 1 7 8 1 ) , a professor o f experimental physics at Turin, Franklin revealed that
he knew o f "Puckeridge." He also wrote that the first time he had heard music
produced on a set o f musical glasses had been at a performance given by Delaval.
He continued:
Being charmed with the sweetness of its tones, and the music [Delaval] produced
from it, I wished only to see the glasses disposed in a more convenient form, and
brought together in a narrower compass, so as to admit a greater number of tones,
and all within reach of hand to a person sitting before the instrument, which I
accomplished, after various intermediate trials, and less commodious forms, both
of glasses and construction, in the following manner. (cited in Labaree, 1966,
p. 127)
The rest o f Franklin' s letter offers a detailed account o f how he was stimulated to
invent the "glassychord" (sometimes appearing as Glassy-Chord), which he then
renamed the armonica. Franklin explained: "In honour o f your musical language,
I have borrowed from it the name o f this instrument, calling it the Armonica."
Almost immediately, however, some individuals added an "h" to the beginning of
the new name, which meant "harmony." T h e y called it the harmonica, fostering
the mistaken belief that Franklin actually invented the mouth organ. 4
Franklin's armonica, which King (1946) claimed is the first popular musical
instrument invented by an American, was probably completed in May o f 1761. Its
music was ethereal, mystical, otherworldly, and ghostlike. The notes seem to
c o m e from nowhere in particular and then linger in the air. It revolutionized the
playing o f musical glasses. B y the end of 1762, the instrument was being built
commercially in L o n d o n by Charles James and by Hughes and Co. at the Cockpit
Glasshouse.
Figure 3 shows an engraving that Franklin commissioned in 1772-1773 o f his
armonica (see Labaree, 1966, pp. xvi-xvii, 121). The main reasons for Franklin's
3 Franklin was elected to the Royal Society on April 29, 1756, and was formally admitted on
November 24, 1757. After backing Edward Hussey Delaval as his first nomination to the society (on
May 17, 1759), he recommended at least 36 other men to be Fellows before 1774. Like Delaval,
many of these men shared his interests, most notably in electricity and related sciences. The two
other backers of Delaval were F. Blake and B. Wilson (see Labaree, 1965, pp. 356-360).
4 Labaree (1966, p. 118) pointed out that the earliest public appearance of the name armonica
can be found in an advertisement by Charles James of London in Jackson's Oxford Journal dated
May 29, 1762. James wrote that he had been employed to manufacture the instrument by an
"ingenious and well known inventor."
GLASS ARMONICA
Figure 3.
p. 121).
331
An 18th-century engraving of Franklin's armonica (see Labaree, 1966,
invention were to increase the ease with which one could play the musical glasses
and to enhance the sound quality. His armonica consisted of soda-lime bowls
(glasses without stems) of different sizes, each of which was blown and tuned by
grinding by an experienced glassblower. The demands were such that only one out
of every hundred bowls blown could be used in a set. Selecting pre-tuned bowls
had a distinct advantage over the musical glasses of old, which were time
consuming to tune and difficult to keep tuned, because the liquids evaporated.
Franklin had a hole drilled through the center of each bowl so they could be
fitted one into the other (from large to small) on a wooden axle, with a small cork
between each bowl to keep one from touching another. This axle was placed
horizontally in a wooden case and attached to a foot treadle, so that the performer
could continually spin the bowls with his foot. The rims of different glasses were
painted to indicate different notes, and later damp sponges were added to keep the
rims of the glasses moist.
To play Franklin' s armonica, one simply touched the rims of the glasses with
moistened fingers while they were spinning. Because the hand no longer needed
to circle the rim of the glass, several bowls could be played at the same time with
a single hand. Furthermore, because the glasses fit nicely into a case, the
instrument was less cumbersome than the verrillon.
Like other musical glasses, the sounds from the armonica were thought to
have psychological effects on the listener. Franklin, who enjoyed playing his
332
GALLO AND FINGER
instrument and even wrote songs for it, knew that its music could affect some
people. This is indicated by the following passage, which is translated from a
m e m o i r written by Princess Izabella Czartoryska o f Poland (1746-1835). In 1772
she wrote:
I was ill, in a state of melancholia, and writing my testament and farewell letters.
Wishing to distract me, my husband explained to me who Franklin was and to what
he owed his fame... Franklin had a noble face with an expression of engaging
kindness. Surprised by my immobility, he took my hands and gazed at me saying:
pauvre jeune femme. He then opened a harmonium, sat down and played long. 5
The music made a strong impression on me and tears began flowing from my eyes.
Then Franklin sat by my side and looking with compassion said, "Madam, you are
cured." Indeed that moment was a reaction to my melancholia. Franklin offered to
teach me how to play the harmonium--I accepted without hesitation, hence he
gave me twelve lessons. (translated in Lipowski, 1984, p. 362)
The armonica was an instant success, especially in the hands o f virtuoso
Marianne Davies (c. 1 7 4 4 - c . 1818), who received one from Franklin and began to
play it in public in January 1762 (Baldwin & Wilson, 1995; Labaree, 1966; M e y e r
& Allen, 1988). 6 Along with her sister Cecilia (c.1756-1836), who sang to the
music, Marianne performed English, Scotch, and Italian airs and popular tunes in
m a n y culture-hungry cities, including Dublin, Florence, London, Milan, Pads,
and Turin.
In 1767 Marianne and Cecilia Davies played in Vienna, where the Mozarts
might have heard the armonica for the first time. 7 This m a y also have been when
M e s m e r first heard the armonica, because he had a passion for music and was then
living in the city.
M e s m e r a n d the M o z a r t s
Franz Anton M e s m e r was born in 1734 in the beautiful Lake Constance
region o f Germany. H e attended some o f the finest schools, although it is unclear
which degrees he actually earned and which he falsified. He studied philosophy
at the University o f Dillinger in Bavaria, theology at the University o f Ingolstadt
in Bavaria, and law for a year at the University o f Vienna, all before he spent 6
years studying medicine in Vienna. As far as can be ascertained he did obtain his
M D degree from the Vienna Medical School, although his Doctorate o f Philosophy was probably not legitimately earned (see Pattie, 1994).
5 The use of the term harmonium to refer to the armonica is misleading, as harmonium is
generally reserved for the reed organ patented in 1842 by Alexandre Debain (1809-1877). The
sound from the harmonium is created by pumping foot treadles to force air past metal reeds (Bemer,
1995).
6 Marianne Davies, the daughter of a musician, was already known in England as a professional
singer and as a player of both the flute and the harpsichord when she turned to the armonica. There
is no hard evidence to suggest that she was related to Franklin, although this possibility has been
raised. More than anyone else, Davies popularized the armonica in the German-speaking European
countries. In 1783, thinking about her own financial future, she tried to convince Franklin not to
instruct others on the instrument.
7 Written evidence that the Mozarts had heard Davies play can be found in a letter from
Leopold Mozart to his wife dated 1771 (see King, 1946).
GLASS ARMONICA
333
In 1768, shortly after graduating from medical school, Mesmer married Mafia
Anna von Posch (sometimes spelled Bosch), a wealthy Austrian. They settled in
a large mansion in Vienna, where he bought an armonica and also built an outdoor
theater. Mesmer loved to play his armonica after dinner and became so attached
to it that he even requested its music on his deathbed (Buranelli, 1975).
Although it is unclear how the two met, it is certain that Franz Anton Mesmer
and Leopold Mozart (1719-1787) enjoyed each other's company and spent
considerable time in Vienna together. Young Wolfgang Mozart (1756-1791) met
Mesmer when he was in Vienna from 1767 to 1768 with his father. Leopold was
hoping to get his son's opera La Finta Simplice performed. Unfortunately, the
impresario had doubts about the opera's potential for financial success, and the
work was not played.
Mesmer, however, took pity on the disappointed Mozarts. In the fall of 1768
he commissioned the opera Bastien und Bastienne (Pattie, 1994). Although it has
been written that Mesmer built his private garden theater specifically for the
young Mozart, this was probably not the case, because Mesmer had entertained in
his garden theater well before the Mozarts came to Vienna (see the letters below).
The impressionable young Wolfgang never forgot Mesmer. He even made a witty
(if not satirical) reference to him in his opera Cosf fan tutte, which was first
performed in 1790. The reference to Mesmer is made at the end of Act I, where
a chambermaid, masquerading as a doctor, makes a comical entrance and proceeds to cure her poisoned patients using a magnet. She proclaims: "This is that
piece of magnet, the stone of Mesmer, who originated in Germany, and then
became so famous in France" (Pattie, 1994, p. 33). 8
It is clear from two letters from Leopold Mozart to his wife that Mesmer
enjoyed exhibiting and playing his armonica for his guests (Pattie, 1994). In the
first letter, dated July 21, 1773, the elder Mozart wrote:
The Mesmers are all well and in good form as usual. Herr von Mesmer, at whose
house we lunched on Monday, played to us on Miss Davies's Harmonica or glass
instrument and played very well. It cost him about fifty ducats and is very
beautifully made. . . . We dined with them on Saturday and also on Monday.
(translated in Buranelli, 1975, p. 56)
A month later, Leopold boasted that Wolfgang had played on Mesmer's armonica:
Do you know that Herr von Mesmer plays Miss Davies's harmonica unusually
well? He is the only person in Vienna who has learnt it and he possesses a much
finer instrument than Miss Davies does. Wolfgang too has played upon it. How I
should like to have one! (translated in King, 1946, p. 109)
Nevertheless, the younger Mozart did not seem to have much to say in public
about the armonica until he heard Marianne Kirchg~issner (1769-1808) play it
years later. Kirchg~issner was a blind German armonica player who had made
numerous successful tours around Europe. In 1791 she played in Vienna, where
8 It is interestingthat there are also several references to the psychologicalpowers of music in
Mozart's opera The Magic Flute, in which the flute turns gloom into joy, and the magical bells
(played on the glockenspiel) ward off the malevolentslaves by making them merry (Act I, Scene
III).
334
GALLO AND FINGER
Mozart was so inspired by the performance that he composed his "Adagio and
R o n d o for Glass Harmonica, Flute, Oboe, Viola and Cello" (K.617) and "Adagio
Solo for the Glass H a r m o n i c a " (K.356) for her (Pohl & Pisarowitz, 1995).
Numerous other composers also wrote musical pieces for the armonica in the
late 1700s and early 1 8 0 0 s - - a t the same time that more manufacturers were
entering the business, especially in German-speaking countries. More than 300
original compositions have been discovered (Meyer & Allen, 1988). A m o n g the
composers was Ludwig van Beethoven ( 1 7 7 0 - 1 8 2 7 ) , who used the armonica to
a c c o m p a n y spoken words in one part o f his incidental music for Leonora Prohaska (op. 202).
The armonica became so popular that Marie Antoinette (1755-1793) took a
fancy to it, and even Johann Wolfgang Goethe ( 1 7 4 9 - 1 8 3 2 ) claimed to be drawn
to the beauty o f the armonica's sustained "chords" (King, 1946). 9 When Thomas
Jefferson (1743-1826) replaced Franklin as American Representative to Paris, the
future American president and chief architect o f the Declaration o f Independence
considered ordering one from London. 1°
T h e R i s e o f M e s m e r i s m in V i e n n a
M e s m e r ' s medical dissertation bore the title Dissertatio Physico-medica de
Planetarum Influx (The Influence of the Planets on the Human Body) and was
published in 1766. F r o m the start, however, some o f his more scholarly critics
noted that many o f the "novel" ideas in M e s m e r ' s dissertation were not really
original; rather, they were reincarnations o f theories originating centuries earlier
from the Swiss iatrochemist Paracelsus (1493-1541) and others, tl In fact, it was
later discovered that although M e s m e r mentioned the English physician Richard
M e a d (1673-1754) in his introduction, some o f his passages were actually copied
from a revised edition o f M e a d ' s (1704) book, which translates as On the
Influence of the Sun and Moon Upon Human Bodies and the Diseases Arising
Therefrom (Pattie, 1994).
Like m a n y others at the time, M e s m e r was also influenced by Sir Isaac
N e w t o n ' s theory o f gravity. M e s m e r first used the term animal gravity, but he
later switched to his more famous term, animal magnetism. Specifically, he wrote
that animal gravity/magnetism is an imperceptible fluid, one that can be found
9 Johann Wolfgang von Goethe was more than an early Romantic poet and novelist; he was
also interested in science and aesthetics (see Lewes, 1911). He studied art in Italy, and his
multivolume works on vision were written largely from an experiential, subjective perspective.
Goethe argued that Sir Isaac Newton had presented only a sterile (and less than accurate) theory of
light. In contrast, he called for a multidimensional approach to understand perception, which in his
mind had much to do with personal meaning, affect, and beauty.
1o Although Jefferson was taken by the armonica, he was not taken by Mesmer, and vocally
opposed his theories.
11Paracelsus was the adopted name of Philippus Aureolus Theophrastus Bombastus von
Hohenheim. He was a charismatic, egotistic, and argumentative man who lived during the European
Renaissance and openly questioned the ancient theory of four elements and with it Greco-Roman
humoral theory. His iatrochemistry, or medical chemistry, was an alternative based on the principles
of sulfur (combustibility), mercury (vapor), and salt (solidity; Debus, 1966). Nevertheless, Paracelsus tied his new ideas to astrology and the supposed nature of the cosmos. Kept on the run by the
conservative opposition, he died in Salzburg, Austria, in 1541.
GLASS ARMONICA
335
throughout the cosmos. Because of this subtle, uniting fluid, every object in the
universe can influence every other object. Indeed, the distant planets in the
heavens can even influence the nerves and hence the physiological state of the
animal or human body.
Mesmer's 27 principles of animal magnetism appeared in his M~moire sur la
ddcouverte du magndtisme animal (1779). In this work he explained that what he
now perceived as a single fluid had under different circumstances been called
gravity, fire, light, magnetism, and electricity. He maintained that disruption of the
normal flow of this fluid through the body could account for some (but not all)
illnesses. Further, he contended that a well-trained physician could learn to locate
the blocks and, by touch, massage, and other acts channel animal magnetism
through the body to provide cures. Unlike his contemporary, Jean-Joseph Gassner
(1727-1779), Mesmer did not see any need to bring theology into the equation.
In the 1770s, Francesca Oesterlin resided with the Mesmers while she coped
with violent bouts of hysteria. By using magnets to control the "ebb and flow" of
her symptoms (an idea that he learned from Jesuit astronomer Father Maximilian
Hell; 1720-1792), Mesmer successfully treated her hysteria, lz In his own words:
It was on July 28, 1774, that my patient having suffered another of her attacks, I
placed three magnets on her, one on the stomach and one on each leg. Almost
immediately she began to show severe symptoms. She felt painful volatile currents
moving within her body. After a confused effort to find a direction, they flowed
downward to her extremities. Alleviation followed and lasted for six hours. A
repetition of the attack on the following day caused me to repeat the experiment,
with the same success. (Mesmer, 1779, translated in Buranelli, 1975, p. 62)
After further experimentation, Mesmer came to believe that it was not the
properties of the magnets themselves that led to the beneficial effects but rather
his special ability to "magnetize" with animal magnetism. This revelation led him
to abandon metal magnets and instead to turn to the use of other objects that he
himself had magnetized.
In an early attempt to reveal his discovery to the physicians of Vienna,
Mesmer demonstrated the effects of animal magnetism on Francesca Oesterlin to
Jan Ingenhousz (1730-1799), the Dutch-born physician who discovered photosynthesis, promoted inoculation against smallpox, and experimented with electricity (Buranelli, 1975). Like Delaval, he had been brought into the Royal Society
by Benjamin Franklin (in 1769). Apparently Ingenhousz, who was then serving as
court physician in Vienna, was not impressed; in fact, he denounced Mesmer and
became one of his most vocal critics.
Ingenhousz remained in contact with Franklin and, in 1778, even wrote the
following to the American, who had arrived in Paris late in 1776 as the American
Commissioner to France:
I hear from Fontana the Vienna conjuror Dr. Mesmer is at Paris, that he has been
presented to the Royal academy, that he still pretends a magnetical effluvium
12The notion that magnets can be used to treat illness dates back at least to the Middle Ages,
and even to this day one can purchase magnets that are claimed to have healing properties (see
Macklis, 1993, for a historical review of this topic, as well as a discussion of some contemporary
issues).
336
GALLO AND FINGER
streams from his finger and enters the body of any person without being obstructed
by walls or any other obstacles, and that such stuff, too insipid for to get belief by
any old woman, is believed by your friend Mr. Le Roy, who protects him and will
recommend him in London, where he has a mind to exercise his magnetical
effluvia. (Lopez, 1988, p. 506)
As can be ascertained from this scathing letter, Mesmer was already being put
on the defensive in Vienna. In fact, after a failed attempt in 1777 to find a
permanent cure for the blindness of Maria Theresa Paradis (1759-1824), he was
asked to stop "all this nonsense" by the empress; an event that stimulated him to
move from Vienna to Paris, albeit with his armonica (Buranelli, 1975). Paradis,
who unlike Marianne Kirchg~issner probably suffered from psychogenic blindness
since she was a child, had been a very talented and extremely popular pianist and
composer in Vienna. She was a friend of the Mozarts, and Wolfgang wrote his
"Concerto in B-flat" (K.456) specifically for her (Angermueller, 1995).
M e s m e r in Paris
Settling in Paris after the disappointing Paradis incident, Mesmer opened a
clinic in an elegant room at the Place Vend6me in 1778. His practice proved so
successful that he later moved to a larger space in Cr6teil, just outside of the city.
At this time, Mesmer was assisted by Charles-Nicolas Deslon (in some places
appearing as D'Eslon or d'Eslon; 1750-1786), a prominent physician to the royal
family and member of the Paris Facult6 de M6decine.
It was while in Paris that Mesmer perfected his s6ances (Figure 4). The s6ance
room, at least in the height of his clinic' s popularity, contained four large tubs, or
baquets. Inside the tubs were water and iron bars or iron filing that Mesmer had
Figure 4. An 18th-century portrayal of Mesmer treating a woman at one of his
s6ances while others sit by a covered baquet (see Walmsley, 1967, pp. 128-129).
GLASS ARMONICA
337
supposedly magnetized with his animal magnetism. His patients, usually wealthy
Parisian men and women, would enter the dimly lit room and stand around these
baquets, touching the magnetized bars to the ailing parts of their bodies. Mesmer
would enter the room wearing flowing garments and check on each patient's
progress.
Instrumental to a cure, Mesmer believed, was that a patient be brought to a
crisis. This term referred to an emotional escalation often resembling a fit, with
limbs shaking and fainting, which sometimes forced the removal of a patient to a
padded room until he or she calmed down (Buranelli, 1975; Pattie, 1994). The
social contagion that took place during the group srances, in addition to
the rituals, mirrors, and testimonials, functioned to enhance the effects of the
treatment. ~3
It is often held that Mesmer played his armonica at his srances as background
music to set the mood (Fancher, 1996). In reality, the instrument was even more
important to the ritual than this impression would suggest. Mesmer believed that
the presence of music could ease the flow of animal magnetism into the ailing
person's body. Proposition 16 in the M~moire sur la dgcouverte du magn~tisme
animal (1779) states that animal magnetism can be communicated, propagated,
and reinforced by sounds. Consistent with this belief, Mesmer often played the
armonica during his srances, hoping to facilitate the flow of animal magnetism.
M a n y patients were quite responsive to what Mesmer was doing and offering.
Witness what was written by a Dr. Le Roux sometime between 1778 and 1779
about the reactions of an army surgeon that he had taken to Mesmer's clinic for
treatment of gout:
After several turns around the room, Mr. Mesmer unbuttoned the patient's shirt
and, moving back somewhat, placed his finger against the part affected. My friend
felt a tickling pain. Mr. Mesmer then moved his finger perpendicularly across his
abdomen and chest, and the pain followed the finger exactly. He then asked the
patient to extend his index finger and pointed his own finger toward it at a distance
of three or four steps, whereupon my friend felt an electric tingling at the tip of his
finger, which penetrated the whole finger toward the palm. Mr. Mesmer then
seated him near the harmonica; he had hardly begun to play when my friend was
affected emotionally, trembled, lost his breath, changed color, and felt pulled
toward the floor. (cited in Pattie, 1994, p. 73)
Another account described the effects of Mesmer's music on Deslon, his assistant:
Mesmer experimented on him--apparently not very seriously--by playing on the
glass harmonica or the piano and conveying animal magnetism to him. D'Eslon
was obliged to beg for mercy about the music, presumably because of the
discomfort caused by the charge of animal magnetism which it carried. (Pattie,
1994, p. 103)
During his stay in Paris, Mesmer not only used the armonica in his srances
but also continued to play it for his own personal enjoyment and to entertain
13With groups of more than 20, Mesmer tied a rope around the people holding the metal rods
at the baquet and extended the rope to others farther away in the room. He also had each person hold
a neighbor's thumb as a way to allow the magnetic fluid flow without blockage down the chain.
338
GALLO AND FINGER
guests. King (1946, p. 110) tells of an encounter between Gluck and Mesmer in
1779. Apparently, Mesmer played the armonica for him and Gluck was so
impressed that he advised Mesmer to improvise instead of playing from sheet
music.
Later in 1779, Mesmer invited Franklin and Madame Billion (1744-1824), an
accomplished musician and Franklin's friend, to his house to hear the armonica
(Lopez, 1993; McConkey & Perry, 1985). Franklin already knew about Mesmer
from Ingenhousz as well as from other sources. The details of this meeting remain
unclear, although a letter from Madame Billion suggests that Mesmer was more
interested in discussing "electrical fluid" with Franklin than he was in playing the
armonica for his guests (McConkey & Perry, 1985). This is understandable,
considering Franklin was one of the world's foremost authorities on electricity at
this time, having even conducted several trials with electrical stimulation as a
means of relieving certain nervous diseases. ~4 To say the least, Franklin, like
Ingenhousz before him, was not dazzled by Mesmer's theory of animal magnetism. But whether Mesmer was an outright charlatan or was simply misinterpreting what was taking place was anything but clear.
Franklin and the C o m m i s s i o n
As in Vienna, Mesmer was not well received by the scientific elite in Paris,
despite the success of his clinic in catering to aristocrats and the wealthy. His
theory was rejected as nonscientific by the French Academy of Sciences, and
subsequently the Royal Society of Medicine ignored his letters requesting that he
be allowed to present his ideas to its members (Buranelli, 1975). In a letter written
about a month after they had met, Mesmer invited Franklin back to witness some
cures, so that he could "discover for himself the advantages of animal magnetism"
(McConkey & Perry, 1985, p. 124). It is unclear whether they met this second
time.
In 1782 the working relationship between Mesmer and Deslon was strained.
Although Deslon had great respect for his mentor, he wanted to exert his own
independence as a practitioner of animal magnetism. However, Mesmer maintained that he alone truly understood animal magnetism, and his egotism came
between the two. He became infuriated with Deslon when, during Mesmer's visit
to Spa in 1782 for a well-needed rest, Deslon set up his own animal magnetism
clinic in Paris. The two were unable to permanently reconcile their differences
(Pattie, 1994).
14BenjaminFranklin experimentedwith electricityfrom 1747 to 1755. He is best remembered
for his experiments with kites and lightning rods but also among historians for his 1751 pamphlet
Experiments and Observations on Electricity, Made at Philadelphia in America. In it, Franklin
explains that he "electricized"a numberof patients who came to him for treatmentof paralyses from
various parts of Pennsylvania. Nevertheless, he emerged skeptical about electricity being an
effective treatment for paralyses. In 1759, he penned a letter to John Pringle of the Royal Society
in which he suggestedthat some of the so-calledelectrical cures could be more easily explainedby
suggestion and expectation. To quote: "I never knew any advantagefrom electricityin palsies that
was permanent. And how far the apparent temporaryadvantagemight arise from the exercise in the
patients' journey, and coming daily to my house, or from the spirits given by the hope of success
[italics added]... I will not pretend to say" (Franklin, 1759; cited in Smyth, 1905-1907, Vol. 3, p.
426).
GLASS ARMONICA
339
In 1783 Mesmer and Nicolas Bergasse (1750-1832) founded the Society of
Harmony. The new society was modeled after the French Masonic lodges (for a
history of these societies see Gravitz, 1997). 15 Although it became somewhat of
a cult group dedicated to the principles of mesmerism and clean living (e.g., no
tobacco), it included Franklin's rebellious grandson, William Temple Franklin
(1760-1823), and the Marquis de Lafayette (1757-1834). Lafayette tried to
introduce mesmerism to America by writing highly about it and Mesmer to
George Washington (1732-1799).
From his letter to the Countess d'Houdetot we know that Franklin was making
serious inquiries about animal magnetism in 1784, asking whether any real cures
had been achieved (McConkey & Perry, 1985). In another letter dated March 19
of that same year he even wrote:
I cannot but fear that the expectation of great advantage from this new method of
treating disease will prove a delusion . . . . There are in every great, rich city,
a number of persons who are never in health, because they are fond of medicines... If these people can be persuaded to forbear their drugs, in expectation of
being cured by only the physician's finger, or an iron rod pointing at them, they
may possibly find good effects, though they mistake the cause. (Franklin, 1784;
cited in Smyth, 1905-1907, Vol. 9, pp. 182-183)
In 1784, King Louis XVI of France formed a commission to investigate
mesmerism and animal magnetism (see Gauld, 1992, and Pattie, 1994, for
accounts of the formation of this and other commissions). The commissioners
were four physicians (Sallin, D'Arcet, Guillotin, and Borie, who died during the
investigation and was replaced by Majault), as well as Franklin and four other
illustrious members of the Royal Academy (Bailly, De Bory, Le Roy, and
Lavoisier). Although this commission had greater impact and is more frequently
cited (e.g., Howard, 1975; Gould, 1989), a second royal commission consisting of
members of the Royal Medical Society was also appointed, 1 month after the
major commission was formed.
Over a period of 5 months, Franklin's commissioners conducted several
experiments with the cooperation of Deslon to determine whether animal magnetism really existed. Because he was now in his late 70s and suffering from gout,
the commissioners opted to conduct some of their telling experiments at Franklin's residence at Passy, France, so that the acknowledged patriarch of clear
thinking and good science could observe and assess the claims for animal
magnetism in person.
Several of the tests devised by Franklin, Lavoisier, and the other commissioners were quite clever, even by modem standards (Gould, 1989). They told
some subjects that nonmagnetized objects were magnetized; explained to one that
Deslon was in the room magnetizing her, or that he was in another room directing
the powerful fluid at her, when in fact he was not even present (she quickly went
into a state of crisis in both tests); and had still others magnetized without them
knowing about it. In one such test, Deslon failed to magnetize an uninformed
~5Mesmer, Wolfgang Mozart, and Franklin were all members of the Freemasons. Before
moving to Paris, Mesmer had joined the Wahrheit und Freiheit Masonic lodge in Vienna. It was
known for examining new scientific developments from old and even ancient perspectives.
340
GALLO AND FINGER
seamstress through a doorway covered with paper (he had earlier claimed that
paper should not block the flow of magnetic fluid).
Some of the commissioners even tried to have themselves magnetized at
Deslon's Paris clinic, where they spent many hours at the baquet. When the
testing moved to Passy, Franklin also served as a subject but, like his esteemed
younger colleagues, reported only boredom.
In yet another experiment, Deslon attempted to magnetize an apricot tree in
Franklin's garden. A sickly boy hand selected by Deslon as being very sensitive
to animal magnetism was then instructed to walk through the garden to see if he
would go into a state of crisis on approaching the tree. This test was especially
important because the commissioners themselves were too skeptical, only from
the educated upper classes, and (other than Franklin) in good health. Although the
boy started to move about erratically on entering the garden, he had a crisis at a
different tree. Virtually the identical thing happened when Lavoisier played the
same game on a sensitive woman using several cups of water at his home.
The commissioners eventually concluded that there was no physical (sensory)
evidence for the existence of a measurable fluid called animal magnetism. They
never denied that some people had been cured by the mesmerizers, but added that
testimonials, cures, and other claims of success could easily be explained by
suggestion, especially in people with vivid imaginations. These conclusions were
in accord with what Franklin had been thinking on his own, and his signature
appeared first on the report when it was issued in 1784 (see Franklin, 1785, for an
English translation of the report). 16
Mesmer, to no one's great surprise, objected vigorously to the damning
report, which effectively compelled him to leave Paris. Among other things, he
argued that Deslon, with whom he had split, was in no way fit to defend his theory
of animal magnetism. Mesmer's tirade, however, fell on deaf ears. Within a year
or so of the final report, he left Paris to travel in relative obscurity for the next 20
years (Ellenberger, 1970). Although the details of this part of Mesmer's life are
sketchy, we know that he was expelled from Vienna in 1793 for being politically
suspect and that he returned briefly to Paris in 1798. He finally settled in
Frauenfeld, Switzerland, where he lived comfortably for the last several years of
his life and continued to practice animal magnetism (see Pattie, 1994, for a review
of Mesmer's life during this period).
In a letter to his friend Ingenhousz in 1785, penned shortly before Mesmer
had left the city, the aged Franklin now summed up his feelings toward Mesmer,
also commenting on the proliferation of medical quackery and a new cult in Paris:
Mesmer continues here [in Paris] and has still some Adherents and some Practice.
It is surprising how much Credulity still subsists in the World. I suppose all the
Physicians in France put together have not made so much Money during the Time
he has been here, as he has done. And we have now a fresh Folly. A magnetizer
pretends that he can by establishing what is called a Rapport between any Person
16The report issued by the Royal Society of Medicine was in the same spirit of Franklin's
report, although there was one commissionerwho wrote a dissentingopinion. Also, Bailly drafted
a "secret" report that was allegedlywritten for the king and his advisors only, in which mesmerism
was attacked on moral grounds and the sensual nature of the treatment was drawn into question
(Gauld, 1992).
GLASS ARMONICA
341
and a Somnabule, put it in the Power of that Person to direct the actions of the
Somnabule, by a simple strong Volition only, without Speaking or making any
Signs; and many people daily flock to see this strange Operation! (Franklin, 1785;
cited in Smyth, 1905-1907, Vol. 9, pp. 320-321)
The "fresh Folly" that Franklin alluded to was probably that of the Marquis
de Puys6gur (1751-1825), a former member of the Society of Harmony. Puysrgur
claimed to be able to elicit what he called the "perfect crisis," later to be called
"artificial somnambulism" because of its similarity to sleepwalking (Fancher,
1996). Puysrgur relied on the power of suggestion to "mesmerize" people and
popularized the hypnotic trance.
W h a t H a p p e n e d to the A r m o n i c a ?
The armonica faded into obscurity after 1830, for several reasons. First and
foremost, many people became fearful that the sounds of the armonica could
affect nervous physiology and mental status, causing fainting, convulsions, illness, marital disputes, and perhaps even death (King, 1946, p. 114). ~7 Among
others, both Marianne Davies and Marianne Kirchgassner, two early masters of
the armonica, had succumbed to health problems. Davies was bedridden for more
than a year, and Kirchg~issner's death "was attributed to deterioration of her
nerves caused by the unusually piercing vibrations of the instrument" (Pohl &
Pisarowitz, 1995, p. 74). In light of such claims, it is no wonder that Domenico
Donizetti (1797-1848) chose to include a part for the glass armonica in the
famous mad scene of his opera Lucia di Lammermoor!
In Germany, where the armonica had enjoyed much of its early popularity,
rumors spread that armonica music could even wake the dead (Finkenbeiner &
Meyer, 1987). Fearful officials and police even had the instrument banned in some
towns.
The instrument's link with mesmerism unquestionably facilitated these associations, especially after animal magnetism had been stigmatized by the authority
of Franklin and the Royal Commission. From this perspective, one can rightfully
say that it was in part the instrument's own inventor, Benjamin Franklin, who
indirectly contributed to the armonica's fall from favor.
A second factor figuring into its decline was that it was expensive to make,
and a third was that it was difficult to maintain. The glass was so brittle that it not
only often broke during transport but could even be shattered by the vibrations
from the instrument's own notes. Because of these factors, the pianoforte may
have overtaken the armonica as a much more practical instrument for the home
(Loesser, 1955, pp. 216-218).
A fourth, final factor worthy of consideration is that during the opening
decades of the 1800s "the style of music was changing from the less sweet
chamber music to a much grander style with large orchestral accompaniment, in
the spirit of the awakening era of romanticism" (Meyer & Allen, 1988, p. 186).
17 Some individuals have raised the possibility that armonica players may have become ill from
lead in the instrument's glasses (Meyer & Allen, 1988). The general consensus, however, is that
there is little in the way of good, convincing evidence for lead poisoning.
342
GALLO AND FINGER
This changing musical climate lessened the demand for the type of music
produced by the armonica.
Today there is a new interest in glass instruments, The renaissance for the
armonica began in 1956, when the American Academy of Arts and Sciences
sponsored the building of an armonica and a concert to mark the 250th anniversary of Franklin' s birth and the 200th of Mozart' s. The movement gathered more
steam in 1981, when master glassblower Gerhard Finkenbeiner rebuilt Franklin's
instrument with "a few changes," including fused quartz glass as opposed to
soda-lime glass, an automatic mister, and a silent motor (Finkenbeiner & Meyer,
1987).
A glass music society now exists, and several professional musicians are
again making a living playing the modified armonica (Finkenbeiner & Meyer,
1987; Meyer & Allen, 1988; Rossing, 1994). And, as in days of old, a few are
even going so far as to advertise the remarkable psychological powers of the
music! One can only wonder whether the strange history of the armonica, which
is so laced with suggestion and extravagant and fanciful medical claims, has
already started to repeat itself.
References
Angermueller, R. (1995). Paradis, Maria Theresa von. In S. Sadie (Ed.), The new Grove
dictionary of music and musicians (Vol. 14, p. 175). London: Macmillan.
Baldwin, O., & Wilson, T. (1995). Davies, Cecilia. In S. Sadie (Ed.), The new Grove
dictionary of music and musicians (Vol. 5, p. 273). London: Macmillan.
Berner, A. (1995). Harmonium. In S. Sadie (Ed.), The new Grove dictionary of music and
musicians (Vol. 8, pp. 169-175). London: Macmillan.
Buranelli, V. (1975). The wizard from Vienna: Franz Anton Mesmer. New York: Coward,
McCann & Geoghegan.
Davis, W. B. (1987). Music therapy in 19th century America. Journal of Music Therapy,
24, 76-87.
Debus, A. G. (1966). The English Paracelsians. New York: Franklin Watts.
Eisel, J. P. (1738). Musicus. Erfurt: J. M. Funck.
Ellenberger, H. F. (1970). The discovery of the unconscious. New York: Basic Books.
Fancher, R. E. (1996). Pioneers of psychology. New York: W. W. Norton.
Finkenbeiner, G., & Meyer, V. (1987). The glass harmonica: A return from obscurity.
Leonardo, 20, 139-142.
Franklin, B. (1785). Report of Dr. Benjamin Franklin, and other commissioners, charged
by the King of France, with the examination of animal magnetism, as now practiced
at Paris. Translated from the French with an historical introduction. London: Printed
for J. Johnston, No. 72, St. Paul's Churchyard.
Gaffurio, F. (1492). Theorica musice.. Milan, Italy: Philippus Mantegalius.
Gauld, A. (1992). A history of hypnotism. Cambridge, England: Cambridge University
Press.
Gould, S. J. (1989). The chain of reason vs. the chain of thumbs. Natural History, 7,
12-21.
Gravitz, M. A. (1997). Mesmerism and masonry: Early historical interactions. American
Journal of Clinical Hypnosis, 39, 266-270.
Heller, G. N. (1987). Ideas, initiatives, and implementations: Music therapy in America,
1789-1848. Journal of Music Therapy, 24, 35-46.
Howard, A. R. (1975). A historical note on animal magnetism. American Psychologist, 30,
863.
GLASS ARMONICA
343
King, A. H. (1946). The musical glasses and the glass harmonica. In Proceedings of the
Royal Music Association (Session LXXII, pp. 97-122). London: Whitehead & Miller.
King, A. H. (1995). Musical glasses. In S. Sadie (Ed.), The new Grove dictionary of music
and musicians (Vol. 12, pp. 823-825). London: Macmillan.
Koestler, A. (1959). The sleepwalkers. New York: Macmillan.
Labaree, L. W. (Ed.). (1965). The papers of Benjamin Franklin: April 1, 1758 through
December 31, 1759 (Vol. 8). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Labaree, L. W. (Ed.). (1966). The papers of Benjamin Franklin: January 1, 1762 through
December 31, 1763 (Vol. 10). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lewes, G. H. (1911). The life and works of Goethe. London: J. M. Dent.
Lipowski, Z. J. (1984). Benjamin Franklin as a psychotherapist: A forerunner of brief
psychotherapy. Perspectives in Biology and Medicine, 27, 361-366.
Loesser, A. (1955). Men, women and pianos: A social history. London: Victor Gollancz.
Lopez, C. A. (Ed.). (1988). The papers of Benjamin Franklin: July 1 through October 31,
1778 (Vol. 27). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
Lopez, C. A. (1993). Franklin and Mesmer: An encounter. Yale Journal of Biology and
Medicine, 66, 325-331.
Macklis, R. M. (1993). Magnetic healing, quackery, and the debate about the health
effects of electromagnetic fields. Annals of Internal Medicine, 118, 376-383.
McConkey, K. M., & Perry, C. (1985). Benjamin Franklin and Mesmerism. International
Journal of Clinical and Experimental Hypnosis, 33, 122-130.
Mesmer, F. A. (1779). Mdmoire sur la d~couverte du magn~tisme animal [Memoir on the
discovery of animal magnetism]. Geneva & Paris: Didot le jeune.
Meyer; V., & Allen, K. J. (1988). Benjamin Franklin and the glass armonica. Endeavour,
12, 185-188.
Newburgh, B. (1759). Essays poetical moral and critical. Dublin, Ireland: Alex M'Culloh.
Pattie, F. A. (1994). Mesmer and animal magnetism. New York: Edmonston.
Pohl, C. F., & Pisarowitz, K. M. (1995). Kirchgessner, Marianne. In S. Sadie (Ed.), The
new Grove dictionary of music and musicians (Vol. 10, p. 74). London: Macmillan.
Rossing, T. D. (1994). Acoustics of the glass harmonica. Journal of the Acoustical Society
of America, 95, 1106-1111.
Smyth, A. H. (Ed.). (1905-1907). The writings of Benjamin Franklin: Collected and
edited with a life and introduction (Vols. 1-10). New York: Macmillan.
Walmsley, D. M. (1967). Anton Mesmer. London: Robert Hale.
Received October 30, 1999
Accepted March 17, 2000 •