Fri Apr 26 21:06:46 1996

From majordom  Fri Apr 26 21:06:46 1996
Return-Path: 
Received: by scholar.cc.emory.edu (5.0/SMI-SVR4)
	id AA28664; Fri, 26 Apr 1996 21:06:46 +0500
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 1996 20:33:20 -0400
From: SheMichael@aol.com
Message-Id: <960426203319_101284670@emout15.mail.aol.com>
To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Subject: Re: Addendum on Secret Mark
Content-Length: 516
Sender: owner-tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: tc-list@scholar.cc.emory.edu

In a message dated 96-04-26 11:55:38 EDT, you write:

>  The long and short of it is: scholars 
>concluded that it was a forgery; and Smith was not amused!

It was a 16th century text incorporating the Secret Mark text, wasn't it?
 Was it supposed to have been a 16th century forgery?  If so, it was an
hidden one, used as the back of another text as I remember, or was it?  Who
was trying to fool whom?  Smith had so many questions, himself, that I
thought he rather ran through most of the possibilities of fraud.

Back