XPost: rec.arts.books.tolkien   
   From: Troels@ThisIsFake.invalid   
      
   In message    
   Stan Brown  spoke these staves:   
   >   
   > On Tue, 21 Feb 2012 11:58:28 +0100, Troels Forchhammer wrote:   
   >>   
   >> The only argument that can potentially have that power is the   
   >> references, including (and possible especially) the statement in   
   >> /Letters/, that Tom B. would eventually lose to Sauron.   
   >   
   > I'm not sure what wold convince a nay-sayer, but one need not even   
   > advert to /Letters/.   
      
   Steuard points out in the essay that 'some have suggested that [the   
   Wise at the Council] intentionally concealed the truth,' and if people   
   are willing to argue that of Gandalf, Elrond, Erestor, Glorfindel etc.,   
   then it does require a direct authorial statement to have any hope of   
   reaching them  :-)   
      
   Not that I disagree at all for my own part -- I, too, think that the   
   evidence of the Council is strong enough to refute any theory that   
   makes Tom, Goldberry, or both be any of the Valar, but to be blunt   
   about it, I think that the ability to assess the strength of evidence   
   is not all that common (to use a completely unrelated example, I think   
   the lack of this ability mars a couple of the essays published in Jason   
   Fisher's (ed.) /Tolkien and the Study of his Sources/).   
      
   --   
   Troels Forchhammer    
   Valid e-mail is    
   Please put [AFT], [RABT] or 'Tolkien' in subject.   
      
       To make a name for learning   
       when other roads are barred,   
       take something very easy   
       and make it very hard.   
    - Piet Hein, /Wide Road/   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)