Theos-Talk Archives (August 2002 Message tt00074)

Ian, you wrote:

"Hello Daniel,
I cannot fault your logic. I agree with you that what was Vol I 
became Vol III. Are you saying that there is an existing manuscript 
of this Vol III preserved in the Adyar Archives ? That Vol III
actually exists but has not been yet published ? If this is so, why 
did GRS Mead not refer to it ? This is the crucial question. We are 
looking for Vol III. If you are saying that it exists in Adyar then 
our quest is over. What I thought everyone was saying is lost, is 
not. It's in Adyar, but not yet published. Is this what you are 
saying ?"

Ian, what I'm trying to say is that there is in the Adyar Archives
Vol I of the SD manuscript from 1886. Look at the contents at:

http://www.blavatskyarchives.com/sdiiitab.htm

In mid-1887, this volume I became volume III.

Therefore Volume I in the Adyar Archives is "in effect" Volume III.

The chart above shows in the 2nd column the contents of volume I from 
1886. All of this material (with 3 exceptions) showed up in the 
published volume III of 1897. Why? 

My answer is: because Volume I of 1886 became Volume III of 1887. 

Please remember that to handwrite a manuscript in the 1880s was a 
laborious task. And to make one copy of it in longhand was an 
equally laborious task. Therefore it is highly unlikely that there 
were multiple copies of the same articles. 

Yet the articles found in the 1886 Volume I show up in the 1897 
Volume III.

I'll let you and Dallas ponder on this. Comments appreciated. I 
hope Dallas will focus in on this point and make some comments.
I will write something later on your observations about G.R.S. Mead.

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://blavatskyarchives.com/introduction.htm