Theos-Talk Archives (November 2006 Message tt01064)

Carlos has written:

==========================================================
I at first thought that

" ...Tillett seems to defend THE PUBLICATION of false letters and
libels in general, IF they are identified as 'doubtful'. This is
something which no true historian would do...."

Now I see his position is that fake letters should be clearly 
identified as fake, not as "doubtful".

Much better,isn't it?
=========================================================

Gregory, is Carlos stating your true position when he writes:

"Now I see his position is that fake letters should be clearly 
identified as fake, not as 'doubtful'."???

Daniel
http://hpb.cc