Theos-Talk Archives (November 2002 Message tt00509)

Brian's unfortunate misunderstanding of Coleman's plagiarism charge 
against HPB

Brian,

Apparently in response to part of what I said in the following 
posting:

Brian's Argument concerning HPB's comments on "Aryans" in ISIS 
UNVEILED
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/8827

you replied:

"Forget Isis and the SD, where [sic] even Daniel C. [sic] Caldwell 
will admit it is full of quotes from other books without reference, 
meaning there is NO WAY we know if watever in there (any quotes from 
Isis or SD) posted on theos-talk, was ideed written by Blavatsky 
(lets stand any Mahatmas.., or was copied from another readely 
available book."

Brian, again I repeat that you apparently do NOT understand William 
Emmette Coleman's contention about HPB's plagiarism.

John Patrick Deveney, the Theosophical historian, in the latest issue 
(Oct. 2002) of THEOSOPHICAL HISTORY, writes about Coleman's claim 
against H.P. Blavatsky.

Deveney writes:

"His claim was that, while the learned QUOTATIONS from classical and 
other sources in H.P.B.'s books would lead the reader to believe she 
had read some 5,000 authors, in fact all of her references could be 
found in approximately 100 easily available, second-hand sources. 
This, Coleman, thundered, was plagiarism." Caps added (Theosophical 
History, Oct. 2002, p. 272.)

Deveney's explanation here is indeed correct because Coleman himself 
confirms it. To cite just one of many examples, Coleman writes:

"By careful analysis I found that in compiling Isis about 100 books 
were used. About 1400 books are QUOTED from and REFERRED to in this 
work; but, from the 100 books which its author possessed, she copied 
everything in Isis taken from and relating to the other 1300. There 
are in Isis about 2100 QUOTATIONS from and references to books that 
were copied, at second-hand, from books other than the originals; and 
of this number only about 140 are credited to the books from which 
Madame Blavatsky copied them at second-hand." caps added.

A CAREFUL reading of Coleman confirms Deveney's recent observations.

Coleman, for example, writes:

"Not a line of the QUOTATIONS in Isis, from the old-time mystics, 
Paracelsus, Van Helmont, Cardan, Robert Fludd, Philalethes, Gaffarel, 
and others, was taken from the original works; the whole of them were 
copied from other books containing scattered QUOTATIONS from those 
writers." caps added.

To be more specific, Brian, if you find a QUOTATION from Paracelsus 
in ISIS UNVEILED Coleman is contending that HPB did NOT go to the 
original works of Paracelsus to get Parcelsus' words. Instead she 
found the quotation (i.e, the words of Paracelsus plus the quotation 
marks) in a secondary work where that author had given the quote from 
Paracelsus. HPB then took the Paracelsus QUOTATION found in this 
secondary work and incorporated the QUOTATION into her book or 
article. Many times she did not indicate that the quotation was 
taken from the secondary work.

Coleman confirms this over and over. Witness another example from 
Coleman:

"The same thing obtains with her QUOTATIONS from Josephus, Philo, and 
the Church Fathers, as Justin Martyr, Origen, Clement, Irenaeus, 
Tertullian, Eusebius, and all the rest. The same holds good with the 
classical authors, - Homer, Ovid, Horace, Virgil, Plato, Pliny, and 
many others. The QUOTATIONS from all these were copied at second-hand 
from some of the 100 books which were used by the compiler of Isis." 
caps added.

Coleman says that HPB did the same when she was writing THE SECRET 
DOCTRINE and her other works.

To repeat Deveney again:

"This, Coleman thundered, was plagiarism."

Brian, now let us explore something else very much related to the 
above. 

ISIS UNVEILED was published in 1877. So Madame 
Blavatsky's "plagiarism" [as Coleman called it]was done even prior to 
that date of publication. YET notice the following which happened in 
1881.

The scholar Deveney writes:

" In the spring and summer of 1881, however, when he himself was 
accused of plagiarism [by W.H. Burr], Coleman's definition [of 
plagiarism] was RATHER DIFFERENT." !! caps added.

Deveney quotes Coleman's rebuttal to W.H. Burr's charges of 
plagiarisms.

Brian, please read very carefully Coleman's rebuttal words. Coleman 
wrote:

"Even were I guilty of what he [Burr] charges, it would not be 
plagiarism. To quote extracts from other authors found in Mr. B
[urr]'s work is not plagiarism but to use Mr. Burr's own language or 
ideas, without credit, is plagiarist. This I have not done, and Mr. 
B. knows it."

A little latter in the same piece, Coleman makes a very SIGNIFICANT 
statement and admission:

"It is ridiculously absurd to call it plagiarism to use quotations 
from other writers, taken second-hand. All writers do it more or 
less, Mr. Burr [himself] very largely, and no one else ever called it 
plagiarism before." 

Coleman's 1881 statements are given in Deveney's article.

I should point out here that by Coleman's 1881 STANDARD HPB was NOT 
guilty of plagiarism in her 1877 work ISIS. 

His 1881 standard was apparently made in defending himself against 
the charge of plagiarism. It was only in later years that Coleman 
apparently changed his definition of plagiarism and 
started "thundering" the charge against HPB! 

Another point.

Brian, there are apparently a few misunderstandings on your part 
contained in what you wrote below: 

"Forget Isis and the SD, where [sic] even Daniel C. [sic] Caldwell 
will admit it is full of quotes from other books without reference, 
meaning there is NO WAY we know if watever in there (any quotes from 
Isis or SD) posted on theos-talk, was ideed written by Blavatsky 
(lets stand any Mahatmas.., or was copied from another readely 
available book."

Brian, you apparently contend there is "NO WAY" to know if the 
extracts I quoted from ISIS UNVEILED were indeed "written by 
Blavatsky" OR was "copied from another readely [sic] available book."

First, I ask you and other interested readers to refresh your memory 
of what I quoted from HPB in ISIS on the aryan subject. See the 
relevant extracts in this Theos-World posting:

"HP Blavatsky in ISIS UNVEILED on the word 'Aryan' and the 'Aryans'"
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/theos-talk/message/8742

NO WAY, you say? But there is A WAY to know! Coleman has given an 
exhaustive list of the "readily available books" he said HPB used in 
ISIS. You and anyone else can therefore go and compare those sources 
with the extracts from ISIS.

So there is A WAY.

Much more could be said about what you have written on this specific 
subject, but I will wait until you address in a "serious" 
and "scholarly" fashion the above points.

Daniel H. Caldwell
BLAVATSKY ARCHIVES
http://hpb.cc