Theos-Talk Archives (September 2005 Message tt00007)

I see that both Dallas T. and Jerry HE. have
made a few brief comments on Ernest Pelletier's
book THE JUDGE CASE.

I wonder if Dallas has read and studied the
review of this book by Brett Forray in THEOSOPHICAL
HISTORY, April, 2005, pp. 14-23.

Forray shows quite clearly that the book is a very
one-sided account of the Judge Case in Judge's favor. 
See Forray's numerous examples of this. 

Although I agree with Jerry that the book is a treasure
trovel of historical documents, it is unfortunate that
Pelletier left out so many other relevant documents. Again
see examples in Forray's review.

I noticed right away that Pelleter had NOT reprinted
Edmund Garrett's booklet ISIS VERY MUCH UNVEILED. This
is a source document of great importance as it includes
facsimiles of many of the Mahatma Letters apparently
received through Judge. The reprinting of this document
would have been helpful to the reader who might want to
carefully compare what Annie Besant wrote in her THE CASE
AGAINST W.Q. JUDGE with Mr. Judge's rebuttals.

Again I see that Pelletier has copied into his book from my website 
the series of articles by H.N. Stokes on the Judge-Tingley 
relationship but did not include other extremely relevant documents 
on my website, such as Judge's diary of Oct-Dec. 1894. This diary 
throws a great deal of light on Judge's deposing of Mrs. Besant from 
co-head of the E.S.T. Etc., etc.

For additional points, see some of my previous comments on material 
in THE JUDGE CASE at:

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200501/tt00027.html

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200501/tt00022.html

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200501/tt00025.html

http://free.hostdepartment.com/r/reneewilliamss/comparison.htm

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/20633

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/20638

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/20842

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/20871

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200501/tt00260.html

http://theos-talk.com/archives/200501/tt00231.html

It is interesting that I sent all of this material directly
to Ernest Pelletier and he never replied even to acknowledge
that he had received the material. You would have thought 
with his interest in the subject matter that he would
have made some kind of reply.

Again Dallas was made aware of all this material and he choose
not to respond either.

As I have read and carefully studied the narratives written by 
Pelletier in this book I have come to the conclusion that Pelletier 
employs (as much as Paul Johnson ever did) speculative possibilities 
with little or no documentation whatsever.

No doubt, Pelletier devoted hundreds if not thousands of hours to
collecting the documents reprinted in this volume and in doing the 
extensive chronological survey and all students of Theosophical 
history owe his a big thanks. But the above mentioned "gaps" 
and "speculations" make the book less than useful especially to 
students who may not know much about the subject but would like to 
know more.

Daniel
http://hpb.cc