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

More Misleading & Untrue Pronouncements

Jan 04, 2007 06:03 PM
by danielhcaldwell

Below are a number of other pronouncements culled from several Theos-
Talk postings:

Mr. Daniel Caldwell has an evident admiration for V. Solovyof....

This is the man Mr. Caldwell, Mr. Green and his other aliases 
consider a good source of historical information about HPB....

As to D. Caldwell, his various aliases and J. Algeo -- well, still 
they did  not have the nerve so far to say that Solovioff is a 
legitimate source of information on HPB....

John Algeo and Daniel Caldwell silently started using Vsevolod 
Soloviof (and the Coulombs) as sources of historical information, 
without ever defending his legitimacy....

These above statements are simply untrue or misleading.

For example in my Theos-Talk posting at:
I wrote:

Solovyoff's book is a valuable historical record but
of course one needs to use some of the material with
caution. Certainly persons interested in the
relationship between Solovyoff and Blavatsky should
read other material that helps one to understand
these events.

Some of the works that should be consulted are:

(1)Cranston's HPB biography (the chapter on Solovyoff)
(2)Beatrice Hasting's "Solovyoff's Fraud"
(3)K.F. Vania's book on HPB
(4)the valuable appendix A in MODERN PRIESTESS which
is a partial translation of HPB's sister Vera's
defense pamphlet in answer to Solovyoff's book.

And several other books and documents.

It should be noted that Boris de Zirkoff, the compiler
of HPB's Collected Writings, even uses material in
Solovyoff's book to document various events in the
"Chronological Survey" of HPB's life for the years 1884,
1885 and 1886.


Now on Theos-Talk Carlos Aveline has almost constantly
been reciting the mantra of slanders, lies, falsehoods
about both the Solovyoff and Coulomb books. And
certainly one must use these books with caution especially
since both authors turned against H.P.B.

Or take another posting of mine at:

In my book I quote only his [Solovyoff's] testimony from 1884 which 
is basically confirmed by HPB and M[orya]. And his testimony, in this 
case, actually supports "the VALIDITY of Theosophical phenomena" (to 
use Michael Gome's words). In my book I did not use any thing from 
his MODERN PRIESTESS OF ISIS. His testimony was only a very small 
part of my book and yet you say Solovyoff "seems to have a major 
influence on Daniel Caldwell's work.

Or another posting at:
where I wrote:

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....

I could go on but the above is enough to show that the pronouncements 
given at the beginning of this posting are .... nonsense.


[Back to Top]

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