Doug kane wrote:

but I was wondering if you or anyone could comment on the steps that a firm like Christies would take to verify the authenticity of something like this.

If you're interested in this particular auction house's process for authentication you should reach out to them directly, as we cannot speak to their process. I'm sure they would accommodate you

This letter is not a forgery, however. Signature is fine, handwriting is fine...etc.

I would not be willing to classify the comments that I have seen as "analysis". Rather, they are comments from people who don't know what they are talking about and are not willing to listen to people who might know more than they do. Here is a sample:

I'm kind of wondering whether it has become economical to forge "authentic" Tolkien letters, especially ones with explosive lore content.

I echo your doubts. I keep saying, "It's Christie's, they're experts at dealing with forgeries, but still..."

We would need a skilled forger who has a sample of Tolkien's handwriting and knowledge of unsolved mysteries that are of interest to the fandom. The auctioning of that previous letter provides a proof of potential financial gain to be made. The forger claiming to have found the letter in the old papers of a dead relative who had presumably received it through mail directly from Tolkien himself would be chain of custody enough.

What strikes me about the letter is how it appears to have been planned in a way to make it particularly enticing for fans while still being short enough to minimize the difficult task of writing like Tolkien - a task in which I feel like the letter isn't entirely successful. Tolkien never in his published letters revealed plot secrets in the manner the new letter does or pretends to do.

As Gandalf said: "I do not like the smell of the left-hand way: there is foul air down there"...

Yeah, the tone is so different from anything in Letters. It's so to the point and without his more flowery or meditative language. And it seems awfully convenient that it's on a Top 10 fan question, never before solved, and not about the origin of athelas or other non-top-charts questions that he still enjoyed answering.

I have not specifically addressed any of these comments. I only wrote:

As surprising as the content is, I have little doubt as to the authenticity of the letter, and there does not appear to be any questions being raised among those who would know (e.g., the Tolkien collector's community, and the Tolkien scholarship community).

But then after writing that, I thought it probably would make sense to consult those who know best about these types of things. Hence my request here.

I don't see anything substantive in any of these quotes, all seems to be idle speculation, conspiracy theory, and no facts or reference provided. Very characteristic of most "information" found on social media.

This is exactly the kind of speculation we do not allow on this site.

Thank you for your comments. Again, the speculation is not my own. I would be happy to delete my post (or have it be deleted) if that is desirable.

Doug kane wrote:

Thank you for your comments. Again, the speculation is not my own. I would be happy to delete my post (or have it be deleted) if that is desirable.

No, thanks for posting. Your post is fine and a valid question to ask.

Trotter wrote:

Doug kane wrote:

Thank you for your comments. Again, the speculation is not my own. I would be happy to delete my post (or have it be deleted) if that is desirable.

No, thanks for posting. Your post is fine and a valid question to ask.

Seconded.

Thank you! I appreciate it.

I would also add that there’s a lot of great content out there in Tolkien’s previous unpublished letters.

Years ago, the Tolkien Estate granted me permission to quote an excerpt from a Tolkien letter talking about Narnia, and I thought that letter was pretty revealing because while we knew at the time Tolkien didn’t care for these stories, we had no comment directly from him explaining why.

All this to say, there’s a lot of revealing material out there in such unpublished letters. And of course, there’s also letters that don’t contain much.

It is a testament to the man that he devoted so much time and energy responding thoughtfully to letters from fans and admirers.

The collectors on this forum know a lot about Tolkien letters and signatures, and they are quick to contact auction houses if any material appears even remotely suspect.

The collectors on this forum know a lot about Tolkien letters and signatures, and they are quick to contact auction houses if any material appears even remotely suspect.

That's exactly why I brought up the suspicions that I was seeing elsewhere here, because I knew that if there was any validity to the suspicions, it would be confirmed here, but that much more likely, they would be debunked.

Would it be acceptable for me to repeat that statement in response to the continued concerns that I see expressed by unknowledgeable "fans" (though without quoting you directly)?

Doug kane wrote:

The collectors on this forum know a lot about Tolkien letters and signatures, and they are quick to contact auction houses if any material appears even remotely suspect.

That's exactly why I brought up the suspicions that I was seeing elsewhere here, because I knew that if there was any validity to the suspicions, it would be confirmed here, but that much more likely, they would be debunked.

Would it be acceptable for me to repeat that statement in response to the continued concerns that I see expressed by unknowledgeable "fans" (though without quoting you directly)?

Of course and they are welcome to post their analysis on the provenance of Letters here for us to see.