Vernon Harrison's J'Accuse is a peer reviewed reassessment, published in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, of the 1885 Hodgson Report, the investigation that had accused Theosophical Society founder Helena Blavatsky of fabricating the Mahatma Letters. Harrison was an experienced document examiner, and his paper directly challenges Richard Hodgson's original forensic handwriting analysis on technical grounds, arguing the original investigation was methodologically flawed. Its authority rests on that specific forensic expertise and on publication through the SPR's own peer reviewed journal, the same body that produced the original report a century earlier. Its limit is that it is one specialist's reassessment of a contested century old case rather than a final settlement, and Theosophical historians continue to debate the Mahatma Letters' authorship, so cite it as a serious documented challenge to the original verdict rather than as having conclusively overturned it.
Facts
Assessment
Reliability Tier2
Vernon Harrison's J'Accuse, a peer reviewed reassessment published in the Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, the middle tier reflecting that it is one specialist's forensic reassessment of a contested century-old case within a body's own journal rather than a final academic settlement, notwithstanding Harrison's genuine documented forensic expertise. NotesPeer-reviewed reassessment of the 1885 Hodgson Report on Madame Blavatsky, Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, 1986.
Citation
AuthorVernon Harrison
PublisherJournal of the Society for Psychical Research
Publication Year1986
Source Typepeer-reviewed article
Connections
Associated With
Helena, Cities This source names Helena directly: "accused Theosophical Society founder Helena Blavatsky of fabricating the Mahatma Letters."
Source J'Accuse: An Examination of the Hodgson Report of 1885Vernon Harrison
Claims Backed By This Source (15 claims)
This source backs 15 claims across the atlas. As facts: 8 well-attested, 2 scholarly debate. As cited relationships: 1 holds, 1 critiqued Here. Plus 3 entities citing it as a general reference with no single fact or relationship attached.
Disposition By Topic
- Sources, 8 claims: 7 well-attested, 1 holds.
- Historical Figures, 4 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 critiqued Here, 2 general references.
- Studies, 2 claims: 1 scholarly debate, 1 general references.
- Articles, 1 claims: 1 well-attested.
Reader Challenges (0)
No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.
Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.