Saturday, November 29, 2008

From the Mouth of Scholars.

An Academic (P)Review of Akins' Lebor Feasa Runda.

An epic throw-down of actual academia versus blatant fraud. Or what looks to be blatant fraud (and probably is).

A bit of background on the author can humorously be found here.

For those interested in Celtic traditionalism they both seem a must read to me. It's not really my forte but it is a fascinating thing to see happening!

My applause goes to LJ-user Alfrecht for taking a stand.

4 comments:

Frater Five said...

I don't know if its academic, but it certainly is an epic throwdown. The author exposes the fraud of the 'book' quite handilly, in such a way that the only way the original author can maintain any form of credibility at all is to give up the actual untranslated text to the academic community for review.

Unfortunatly, thats not going to help with the racists who are using it as a mobilizing agent for their twisted philosophy: These are people who haven't managed to grasp that 'The Protocols of the Elders of Zion' was a falsified text as well.

Jack Faust said...

William_Osbourne: your comment has been deleted because I don't think attacking someone's sexual orientation matters in this case.

Feel free to attack mine first, if you can find anything out about me.

Monsignor Scott Rassbach said...

I'm of three opinions about this:

1) I'm glad that a racist faker is being exposed.

2) I'm disappointed the exposer did not read the book.

3) I don't care greatly about Irish Pre-Christianity.

It's my understanding that he used clips and snippets off the internet. That's fine, but I've seen that done by other people with bad intentions to discredit well written and useful books.

That said, it seems as though the (p)reviwer has a good argument, and given the author's past endeavors at fakery and racism, I don't think the book would stand up under scrutiny. I'm just leery when a reviewer doesn't scrutinize the whole work. Some people have given reviews of books based on the blurb written at Amazon.

Jack Faust said...

"It's my understanding that he used clips and snippets off the internet. That's fine, but I've seen that done by other people with bad intentions to discredit well written and useful books."

I understand your leeriness. I do want to point out that the sections he found on the internet were in fact the introduction and and the first three chapters which alone gave enough material for his critique and attack (and those chapters have not changed since publication). Added to that the background information and you have very, very solid ground to stand on. Could the latter chapters be better? Possibly... But why bother at that point?