[Foucault-L] TLS review of History of Madness

There is a very harsh review of History of Madness in the Times Literary 
Supplement:
http://tls.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,25347-2626687,00.html

It mainly attacks Foucault for his deliberate use of antiquated and 
unreliable sources--concluding that, as a historian, Foucault is a 
charlatan.

It has also heightened my fears about the quality of the translation, 
which I don't think I've heard anyone say anything good about. On a purely 
formal level, from the passage the review provides comparing the new 
translation to Howard's, it looks like the new one has imported the kind 
of syntactic ambiguities which, at least for me, make the English 
translations of Birth of the Clinic and The Order of Things difficult to 
read.

Matthew