Andre Malraux.

Georges Salles

When they are in the street, Georges Salles, the Director of the Museums of France, asks Andre Malraux what he thinks of the clairvoyant, Madame Khodaripacha’s description.  Malraux replies:

“Extraordinary!  She appears to have seen scenes from the life of Alexander the Great…”

Georges Salles says:

“Yes.  She could have said many things which aren’t true;  but most of the images which she describes correspond to our knowledge…”

He pulls a paper from his pocket:

Alexander the Great had one blue eye and one black eye. The clairvoyant saw this detail.

“Listen, I took notes:  the three women, the return from Asia with grape-bearing vine branches on their helmets, the elephants of Darius and Taxil opposing the painted elephants of Porus, the friend killed who was Clitos, the Zouave pants which are those of the Persian cavalry, the soldiers bristling with spikes, Bucephal’s funeral pyre, the different coloured eyes of Alexander…  All that is true!”

Malraux asks:

“What about the camels?”

“The battle of Arbel was fought at Gaugamel.  Gaugamel means: Camel halt…  The site really is the one where the Persian Empire died…  You get the impression that by simply touching the photo of this cloth, Mme Khodari saw unfolding, at an astonishing speed, the principal episodes in the life of Alexander the Great…”

Andre Malraux adds:

“And with astounding accuracy.  Even if she had read a Life of Alexander overnight, she wouldn’t have remembered it so perfectly…

Georges Salles:

“So, thought transmission?”

Andre Malraux:

“Impossible.  We only thought of Alexander the Great when she spoke of the eyes being of two different colours…


“Perhaps it is a transmission of forgotten knowledge;  for, even if we weren’t thinking about it, we know all that she described to us…  I mean, all…  except the essential:  the bloodstain…  Neither of us had thought of that…”


“But is it really blood?  We must have it analysed…  And if we then learn that Mme Khodari was right on that point…  then…”

He doesn’t finish his sentence, but it is clear that he is thinking at this moment that, if the clairvoyant is not mistaken about the stain, he will probably conclude that she is not mistaken about the rest either.  And that, in a prodigious and inexplicable vision, she had really watched a battle of Alexander the Great…

A few weeks later, Georges Salles receives the results of the analysis of the stain;  a stain more than 2,000 years old…

It really was blood…


Madame Khodaripacha knew nothing about the life of Alexander the Great.


Georges Salles thought that it could be thought transmission, but not a reading of the thoughts of the two visitors.  A reading in their memories.  For, both of them perfectly knew Alexander’s life, but neither of them was thinking about him at the moment that the clairvoyant was speaking.  This would suppose on the part of Mme Khodari – if we deduct clairvoyance – a selective vision inside the mountain of knowledge registered in the memories of the two men.  This would be extremely prodigious.  On top of that, we would have to believe that the information extracted by her, through telepathy, produced images in the clairvoyant’s mind…


Andre Malraux thinks that she really saw the scenes that she described, unfolding like a film.


As for the bloodstain, telepathy cannot be envisaged, since neither Georges Salles nor Andre Malraux had thought of that.  Neither had the different conservators who had seen the photo and the cloth.  Everyone thought that it was a drawn or woven heraldic design…


The journalist Victor Franco interviewed Andre Malraux about Mme Khodaripacha.

Andre Malraux said to Victor Franco for the Journal du Dimanche:

“Let us suppose that this medium had been a trickster.  She would have had to have had genius, for it is not given to everyone to recognize the uniform of the Parthe cavalry – even if it was mixed up with Zouave pants.  And to see that Alexander did not have eyes of matching colours, that’s a lot for a simple medium.”

Andre Malraux was very interested in all these phenomena, and even very troubled by them.  One day when a rationalist said to him :

“I believe neither in spiritism, in clairvoyance, nor in parapsychology, for it is impossible to renew the phenomena and the experiments at will”,

he replied:

“Artists don’t control their gifts either…”

And he added:

“Victor Hugo said:  ‘I really did write Olympio…  But I don’t write it every morning…’ “

Parapsychological phenomena are of the same order.