[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next]

Michael Gomes on V.S. Solovyov

May 07, 2006 11:12 AM
by danielhcaldwell

Carlos wrote:

Why should anyone except a slanderer consider Soloviof a
legitimate source of historical information?

But -- why using Soloviof as a source if you are not 
a slanderer?

Again Carlos commented:

So if Daniel, Katinka, Algeo, P. Johnson  and others want 
to look like scholars, they must first of all examine their 
sources, then admit that V. Soloviof, Eleanor Sidgwick and 
Alexis/Emma Coulombs are all liars, and finally start to
stick to facts.

Three good examples these people could follow are Leslie Price, 
Michael Gomes and Ernest Pelletier -- who have different 
positions/opinions, but all respect facts and examine their own 

Now let us take one of these "good examples" that Carlos mentions.

Michael Gomes gives the following estimation concerning Solovyoff:

Although he LATER claimed that he was playing the role 
of the docile inquirer, Solovyov's name appears in
a number of letters to the press [in 1884 for example] 
testifying to the VALIDITY of Theosophical phenomena. 

The publication of Richard Hodgson's damning report of H.P.B. 
in the December 1885 Proceedings of the Society for
Psychical Research, and the attendant ridicule it brought 
to the adherents of Theosophy, must have caused him to RECONSIDER 
his position, for HIS ATTITUDE toward her RADICALLY CHANGED. . . .
Caps added.  Quoted from Gomes' Introduction to Beatrice Hastings'

Now compare the above with what I wrote in ESOTERIC WORLD OF MADAME 

...At first, relations between the two were friendly but Solovyov 
turned against HPB and wrote a book . . . in which he attempted to 
portray HPB as a fraud....



[Back to Top]

Theosophy World: Dedicated to the Theosophical Philosophy and its Practical Application