User talk:ROMOVI

Piper
I have added questions for you on the Leonora Piper talk page. Please take a look at them and reply there so others can see our progress. Kazuba (talk) 17:21, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I am finding the biography of Leonora Piper more interesting as I collect more and more missing details from orginal sources. I do not suspect these missing details have been left out intentionally from some of the other Piper biographies I have encountered. It is just always easier to copy rather than slowly search and examine original sources.Kazuba (talk) 20:57, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Early on according to William James fifteen of his friends received positive first sittings, names and facts. New data. Kazuba (talk) 23:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Suspicious Data
In trance she rose from her chair, walked to a table in the centre of the room, picked up a pencil and paper, wrote rapidly for a few minutes, and handing the written paper to a member of the circle she returned to her seat. The particular member was Judge Frost, of Cambridge, a noted jurist; the message, the most remarkable he ever received, came from his dead son. The report of Judge Frost's experience spread and Mrs. Piper was soon besieged for sittings. Have yet to find primary source or repetitons of this data else where. Kazuba (talk) 23:43, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Thankyou For Hyslop report
Notice Hodgson is copying automatic writing. LOOKS LIKE long hand. No stenographer. Still low funds Hodgson arrived in Boston with an assistant and a typist. No stenographer? Are Piper's ears ever covered and stopped up? In USA? In England? Mrs. Sidgwick never doubted Piper could hear. Book review of Studies in Spiritism in SPR Proceeding 25.Kazuba (talk) 01:20, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Miss X
Miss X author? in England? date?

Blavatsky
Is the following data correct? Proceedings of the SPR Volume 3, pages 201-400, 1885, visually compares handwriting of Helena Blavatsky and Mahatmas' letters. According to Alex Baird, author of Richard Hodgson, page 9, "One does not require to be an expert to observe the similarity." Do I have the right volume, date and page numbers? Please reply. Kazuba (talk) 03:11, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

REPLY: This is correct.

I. REPORT OF THE COMMITTEE INVESTIGATE APPOINTED TO PHENOMENA CONNECTED WITH THE THEOSOPHICAL SOCIETY. 1. STATEMENT AND CONCLUSIONS OF THE COMMITTEE

(...)

After hearing what Mr. Hodgson had to say on these points, and after carefully weighing all the evidence before them, the Committee unanimously arrived at the following conclusions :—•

(1) That of the letters put forward by Madame Coulomb, all those, at least, which the Committee have had the opportunity of themselves examining, and of submitting to the judgment of experts, are undoubtedly written by Madame Blavatsky; and suffice to prove that she has been engaged in a long-continued combination with other persons to produce by ordinary means a series of apparent marvels for the support of the Theosophic movement.

(2) That, in particular, the Shrine at Adyar, through which letters purporting to come from Mahatmas were received, was elaborately arranged with a view to the secret insertion of letters and other objects through a sliding panel at the back, and regularly used for this purpose by Madame Blavatsky or her agents.

(3) That there is conseauentlv a very strong general presumption that all the marvellous narratives put forward as evidence of the existence and occult power of the Mahatmas are to be explained as due either (a) to deliberate deception carried out by or at the instigation of Madame Blavatsky, or (b) to spontaneous illusion, or hallucination, or unconscious misrepresentation or invention on the part of the witnesses.

(4) That after examining Mr. Hodgson's report of the results of his personal inquiries, they are of opinion that the testimony to these marvels is in no case sufficient, taking amount and character together, to resist the force of the general presumption above mentioned.

Accordingly, they think that, it would be a waste of time to prolong the investigation.

As to the correctness of Mr. Hodgson's explanation of particular marvels, they do not feel called upon to express any definite conclusion; since on the one hand, they are not in a position to endorse every detail of this explanation, and on the other hand they have satisfied themselves as to the thoroughness of Mr. Hodgson's investigation, and have complete reliance on his impartiality, and they recognise that his means of arriving at a correct conclusion are far beyond any to which they can lay claim.

There is only one special point on which the Committee think themselves bound to state explicitly a modification of their original view. They said in effect in their First Report that if certain phenomena were not genuine it was very difficult to suppose that Colonel Olcott was not implicated in the fraud. But after considering the evidence that Mr. Hodgson has laid before them as to Colonel Olcott's extraordinary credulity, and inaccuracy in observation and inference, they desire to i disclaim any intention of imputing wilful deception to that gentleman. The Committee have no desire that their conclusion should be accepted without examination, and wish to afford the reader every opportunity of forming a judgment for himself. They therefore append Mr. Hodgson's account of his investigation, which will be found to form by far the largest and most important part of the present Report. In it, and the appendices to it, is incorporated enough of the evidence given by members of the Theosophical Society to afford the reader ample opportunity of judging of both its quantity and quality. There is, however, evidence for certain phenomena which did not occur in India, and are not directly dealt with in Mr. Hodgson's Report. Accounts of these will be found at p. 382, with some remarks on them by Mrs. H. Sidgwick.

The report of Mr. Netherclift on the handwriting of the Blavatsky-Coulomb letters will be found at p. 381. Extracts from the letters themselves are given in Mr. Hodgson's Report, pp. 211-216

The authorship of the letters attributed to Koot Hoomi, which are very numerous, and many of them very long, is fully discussed in Mr. Hodgson's Report. It may be mentioned here that it is maintained by some that the contents of these letters are such as to preclude the possibility of their having been written by Madame Blavatsky. This has never been the opinion of the Committee, either as regards the published letters or those that have been privately shown to them in manuscript. Those who wish to form an independent opinion on the subject are referred to " The Occult World" and " Esoteric Buddhism," which contain many of the letters themselves, and much matter derived from others.

—Preceding unsigned comment added by 189.122.113.239 (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Piper's Hand
Can find no record for testing the validity of Piper's hearing hand. Ears never covered? Why not? Andrew Lang brings up this point. Good point.Kazuba (talk) 22:23, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Final Word from 1915 and 1997 review
This is the final "clean-up" of Piper case. "For her Study is a very fine piece of work, and by reason of its thoroughness, candour, calm and open-mindedness a model for all inquirers into these perplexing phenomena." 
 * Mrs. Henry Sidgwick, A contribution to the study of the psychology of Mrs. Piper’s trance  Proceedings S.P.R. Part 71 Vol 28, Pages 1-657, December 1915

Directed by the SPR to the essay: Mrs. Piper and Geoge Pelham, A Centennial Reassessment by James Munves, Journal of the Society for Psychical Research, October 1997 Volume 62, pages 138-154, No. 849 Mrs. Henry Sidgwick took over the Piper case after Richard Hodgson's death and collected his materials. If I correctly remember, Mrs. (Eleanor) Henry Sidgwick wrote Hodgson's work was sloppy. He had lost objectivity. Hodgson became obsessed with Leonora Piper, and talking to his deceased lover. He shut himself off and talked to the dead in his room.

I tried
I am very sorry for what happened on Leonora Piper. Tried to save our material but I failed. Thanks for supplying data. I'm through with wikipedia. Kazuba (talk) 01:06, 9 December 2009 (UTC)