Home›Articles›The 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same SocietyArticlesThe 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same SocietyCitation FormatsGeneral ReferenceGeneral Reference Citation TextDivinity Atlas. "The 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same Society." Accessed August 30, 2026. https://divinity.interactivelion.com/articles/the-hodgson-report-on-the-theosophical-society-the-1986-reopening-from-inside-the-same-society.Copy General ReferenceAPA StyleAPA Style Citation TextDivinity Atlas. (n.d.). The 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same Society. Retrieved August 30, 2026, from https://divinity.interactivelion.com/articles/the-hodgson-report-on-the-theosophical-society-the-1986-reopening-from-inside-the-same-societyCopy APA StyleBibTeXBibTeX Citation Text@misc{divinityatlas-the-1986-reopening-from-inside-the-same, author = {Divinity Atlas}, title = {The 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same Society}, year = {2026}, url = {https://divinity.interactivelion.com/articles/the-hodgson-report-on-the-theosophical-society-the-1986-reopening-from-inside-the-same-society}, note = {Accessed August 30, 2026} }Copy BibTeXLearn MoreCross-Tradition ConnectionsSourcesComments (0)Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)Learn MoreThe 1986 Reopening, from Inside the Same Society A century later the Society for Psychical Research published a long re-examination by Vernon Harrison, a former president of the Royal Photographic Society and a specialist in questioned documents who had spent a career on forgery detection for a security printer. His paper, titled with deliberate provocation after Zola, argued that Hodgson's central technique was unsound: he was not trained in document examination, he compared hands impressionistically, he treated similarities as proof of identity while disregarding differences, and the Mahatma letters showed characteristics of fluent natural writing rather than of imitation. Harrison also argued that the report's structure betrayed a conclusion reached early, with evidence marshalled toward it and alternatives left unexplored. He did not claim the letters were genuinely from Tibetan masters, and was explicit about that; his claim was that Hodgson had not shown what he said he had shown. The society published the critique and left the original report in its archive without withdrawal, which is the right handling and leaves a reader with two documents rather than a verdict. Theosophical writers treat Harrison as vindication and go further than he did; sceptical writers note that a critique of one investigation is not evidence for the claim it examined. Both observations are correct.Cross-Tradition ConnectionsArticle OnThe Hodgson Report on the Theosophical Society, Studies Well-attested Source Divinity Atlas Long-Form Articles, First Editiontier 1SourcesDivinity Atlas Long-Form Articles, First Editiontier 1Comments (0)No comments yet. Be the first to share a thought.Sign in to join the discussion.Reader Challenges (0 open reader challenges)No disputes yet. Spotted an error or a better source? Open the first one.Sign in to dispute this or suggest a correction.View At A Past YearThe atlas records no dated fact of its own for this entry, so there is no other year to choose.Show This Year