Detractors often accuse the book of extensive plagiarism, a view first seriously put forth by William Emmette Coleman shortly after publication and still expressed by modern scholars such as Mark Sedgwick. Similarly, Geoffrey Ashe notes that "Isis Unveiled" combines "comparative religion, occultism, pseudoscience, and fantasy in a mélange that shows genuine if superficial research but is not free from unacknowledged borrowing and downright plagiarism." Indeed, "Isis Unveiled" makes use of many sources popular among occultists at the time, often directly copying significant amounts of text. However, rather than dwelling on the plagiarism, scholars such as Bruce Campbell argue: "Blavatsky was a person who had an original set of insights but who lacked the literary skills and knowledge of English sufficient to create a work on her own. Relying on written sources and help from friends, she formulated a unique and powerful expression of occult ideas." Joscelyn Godwin and K. Paul Johnson note that early scholarship seemed obsessed with the agenda of exposing Helena Blavatsky as a plagiarist and imposter, but such labels do not properly assess the Theosophical Society's place in the cultural, political, religious, and intellectual history of modern times. The work belongs to a broader movement that seeks to integrate the history of the occult sciences and of esoteric movements with more established subdisciplines. Modern copies of "Isis Unveiled" are often annotated, fully delineating Blavatsky's sources and influences.