CHAPTER III

THE COMING-FORTH OF THE BOOK OF MORMON

WITH the episode commonly known as the "coming-forth of the Book of Mormon " the history of Joseph Smith enters upon a new phase. The production of the alleged "record of the Nephites" introduces him as the preacher of a definite gospel and the arbiter of opinions about God and religion. As in other matters in the history of Smith and his Church, no would-be critic has studied this book with any other motive than to pick flaws and condemn; nor has the reading public ever been informed as to precisely what are its contents, teachings and literary merits. The several theories of its origin, also, are distinguished particularly as masses of bald assumption and plausible possibilities, but without definite and conclusive solutions of the involved matters. Thus, as we shall see, one theory of the origin of this book ascribes its authorship to a certain Solomon Spaulding, a retired Presbyterian preacher of Ohio, whose manuscript had been stolen from a printing office in Pittsburg by a certain Sidney Rigdon, and by him for some obscure and unsatisfactory reason-delivered to Joseph Smith, to serve as the basis of a movement for restoring the Gospel in an age of doubt and apostasy. As an alternate "explanation," several writers have attempted to demonstrate that this book was the product of "automatic writing," which is another rare, indefinite and imperfectly explained phenomenon, as set forth by certain writers on psychology. And all these improbable, indefensible and undemonstrable theories have been formulated to explain the doings of an arrant and shallow "imposter," as they call Smith, whose claims and assumptions are "their own refutation," and "could be seriously considered by no informed mind

In this matter, as in the others, already discussed, the fair and /logical procedure is to give Smith's own story of the origin and production of this book, and then discuss, in turn, the several theories devised to fit the facts/ Nor can we fail to find out at the end of our discussion that there is positively no complete and final explanation of the matter discoverable to the investigator

working on the problem at this late day. That the writing of the Book of Mormon was "no fool's job" must be evident to any unprejudiced reader. Whether or not it be what it professes, a record of God's dealings with certain ancient inhabitants of this continent, it is certainly not the product of an ignorant and diseased brain, bent on perpetrating a hoax-" carrying out the fun," as some critics express it- nor could one readily believe that it had been written originally as a novel. Certain theorists have held that, while the body of the book was written as a novel by Spaulding, the "religious portions" were incorporated by Rigdon, as part of his design for foisting it on the public as a brand-new revelation from God./As may be found on reading the book, Rigdon must have been far more skillful as an editor than was Spaulding as a novelist. The "religious portions," whether appearing in the form of lengthy discourses, or as stray remarks and dialogues, are, so far as the average critic could discern, integral parts of the total work. To omit them, one must seriously mutilate the accounts of various events, as they now stand. It may be asserted, also, that these several discourses and dialogues were evidently uttered, or otherwise promulgated, originally, with no other intention in mind than to enlighten the reader upon the views of Gospel truth therein presented.

Smith's account of the "coming-forth" of this book is as follows: On the morning after the second vision (Sept. 22, 1823), as he records, he visited the hiding place of the plates of Mormon, in company with the angel Moroni. It was on the west side of a "hill of considerable size," now known as Cumorah, and, as Smith says, "owing to the distinctness of the vision which I had had concerning it, I knew the place the instant that I arrived there." He then relates that the golden plates and other objects buried with them were shown him by the angel, who informed him, however, that he would not be allowed to take them away until that date four years thereafter. However, on the anniversary of that day, during the next three years, Smith visited the place, and, finally, on Sept. 22, 1827, was given possession of the plates, the "interpreters (the prophetic "Urim and Thummim ") and other objects concealed with them. Smith's account of this event is thus given in his own words:

"At length the time arrived for obtaining the plates, the Urim and Thummim, and the Breastplate. . . . The same heavenly messenger delivered them up to me with this charge: that I should be responsible for them; that if I should let them go carelessly, or through any neglect of mine, I should be cut off; but that if I would use all my endeavors to preserve them, until he, the messenger, should call for them, they should be protected.

“I soon found out the reason why I had received such strict charges to keep them safe, and why it was that the messenger had said that when I had done what was required at my hand, he would call for them. For no sooner was it known that I had them, than the most strenuous exertions were used to get them from me. Every stratagem that could be invented was resorted to for that purpose. The persecution became more bitter and severe than before, and multitudes were on the alert continually to get them from me if possible. But by the wisdom of God, they remained safe in my hands, until I had accomplished by them what was required at my hand. When, according to arrangements, the messenger called for them, I delivered them up to him; and he has them in his charge until this day.-History of the Church, Vol. I, pp. 18-19. The persecutions mentioned became finally so severe that Smith and his wife were obliged to remove from Manchester, New York, to Susquehanna County, Pennsylvania. In his removal he was assisted by the generosity of Martin Harris, a wellto-do farmer of Palmyra, who, although but recently become acquainted with Smith, had given him $50 for his expenses. Later, after Smith had made a "transcript" of some of the characters, said to appear on the plates, Harris took it to New York, and showed it to Dr. Charles Anthon, and Dr. Samuel L. Mitchill, leading scholars and educators of that city. According to the story told by Harris, Prof. Anthon declared that the letters on the transcript 'were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac [Syriac?], and Arabic," and that the purported translations were correct, wherever attached to the professed originals. Anthon subsequently denied Harris' statements, but, whatever may have occurred, the fact remains that Harris returned to Smith convinced of the truth of his claims, and ready to assist in the work of translating the plates, both by personal labor in writing at Smith's dictation and by the contribution of funds. All this may be attributed to "hypnotic influence," but such explanation seems somewhat "far-fetched," particularly in view of the fact that the supposed object of Harris' "investigation" was to discover whether investment of money in the publication of the book would be advisable However, the story may best be told in the words of the principals. Harris' account, as given by Smith in his journal, is as follows:

"I went to the city of New York, and presented the characters which had been translated, with the translation thereof, to Professor Charles Anthon, a gentleman celebrated for his literary attainments. Professor Anthon stated that the translation was correct, more so than any he had before seen translated from the Egyptian. I then showed him those which were not yet translated, and he said that they were Egyptian, Chaldaic, Assyriac, and Arabic; and he said they were true characters. He gave me a certificate, certifying to the people of Palmyra that they were true characters, and that the translation of such of them as had been translated was also correct. I took the certificate and put it into my pocket, and was just leaving the house, when Mr. Anthon called me

back, and asked me how the young man found out that there were gold plates in the place where he found them. I answered that an angel of God had revealed it unto him. He then said to me, 'Let me see that certificate.' I accordingly took it out of my pocket and gave it to him, when he took it and tore it to pieces, saying that there was no such thing now as ministering of angels, and that if I would bring the plates to him, he would translate them."— Ibid. p. 20.

In opposition to this statement of Harris', there are two letters ascribed to Prof. Anthon, which give his version of the story. They may be quoted in part as follows:

"The whole story about my pronouncing the Mormon inscription to be reformed Egyptian hieroglyphics is perfectly false. Some years ago, a plain, apparently simple-hearted farmer called on me with a note from Dr. Mitchill, of our city, now dead, requesting me to decipher, if possible, the paper which the farmer would hand me.... The paper in question was, in fact, a singular scroll. It consisted of all kinds of singular characters, disposed in columns, and had evidently been prepared by some person who had before him at the time a book containing various alphabets; Greek and Hebrew letters, crosses and flourishes; Roman letters inverted or placed sideways were arranged and placed in perpendicular columns, and the whole ended in a rude delineation of a circle, divided into various compartments, arched with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican calendar, given by Humboldt, but copied in such a way as not to betray the source whence it was derived."- Letter to E. D. Howe, Feb. 17, 1834.

66

Many years ago- the precise date I do not now recollect, a plainlooking countryman called upon me with a letter from Dr. Samuel L. Mitchill, requesting me to examine, and give my opinion upon a certain paper, marked with various characters, which the doctor confessed he could not decipher, and which the bearer of the note was very anxious to have explained. . . . The characters were arranged in columns, like the Chinese mode of writing, and presented the most singular medley that I ever beheld. Greek, Hebrew and all sorts of letters, more or less distorted, either through unskillfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended with a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac. . . On my telling the bearer of the paper that an attempt had been made to impose on him and defraud him of his property, he requested me to give him my opinion in writing about the paper which he had shown to me. I did so without hesitation, partly for the man's sake, and partly to let the individual behind the curtain' [Smith] see that his trick was discovered. The import of what I wrote was, as far as I can now recollect, simply this, that the marks in the paper appeared to be merely an imitation of various alphabetical characters, and had, in my opinion, no meaning at all connected with them."Letter to Rev. T. W. Coit (New Rochelle, New York), April 3, 1841 These variant accounts have been quoted frequently by writers on both sides of the perennial Mormon "controversy "-the Mormons, on the one hand, usually accepting Harris' version, and their critics, on the other, construing Prof. Anthon's characterizations into a complete "expert condemnation" of the existence of the plates of Mormon and of Smith's honesty in the matter of their professed translation or transcription. As may be reasonably

held, however, both conclusions are only partially warranted by the probable facts. Thus, as a careful scholar, it is extremely unlikely that Prof. Anthon remarked definitely that the “translation of such of them as had been translated" was correct; since his knowledge of Egyptian, or "reformed Egyptian”—a term proposed by some writers for Demotic or Hieratic writing - is not known to have been such as would have enabled him to read such texts off-hand. Conversely, also, the remarks in which both the witnesses agree, to the effect that the inscription was a medley of "all sorts of letters," presumably copied, as Anthon suggests, from a "book containing various alphabets," may not be taken as a definite condemnation of the transcription; since, as may be readily verified, a document in Hieratic or Demotic Egyptian script, particularly when copied by one unskilled in, or unaccustomed to, copying such writings, could very easily be made to answer to precisely the description given by Prof. Anthon. Such scripts differ widely from the Hieroglyphic, and so closely resemble archaic forms of several Semitic alphabets that some theorists, notably Isaac Taylor, have suggested that such originated in some earlier forms of the Hieratic style

Unfortunately, the paper examined by Prof. Anthon has not been preserved for us, but another alleged transcription of the characters on the plates of Mormon has been shown by several writers. While certainly a "screed of indefinite origin," it more closely suggests Egyptian Hieratic than "Greek, Hebrew," or any other script, even "Assyriac." If copied from any book "containing various alphabets," as Prof. Anthon suggests, it is quite reasonable to suppose that some form of Egyptian writing also was included. The identity of this "book" must be somewhat doubtful, since few, if any, available to the general reader at that date (1827), gave very definite information on Egyptian writing, unless, indeed, we except the supplement of the Encyclopedia Britannica, issued in 1819, and containing an article on the Egyptian language by Dr. Thomas Young. It is easier to suggest possible sources of a man's information, however, than to prove that he ever used them. We might assume, also, that such a person as Smith is said to have been" ignorant,” “ vagabondish," "dreamy," dreamy," "epileptic" and "hypnotic "- might have assumed that any scrawl he might be pleased to make would pass for "reformed Egyptian," or anything else he might choose to call it. That such a person would ever think of consulting a "book containing various alphabets" is unlikely.

66

Whatever may be the real facts regarding the interview of Martin Harris with Prof. Anthon whether Anthon gave him a written "certificate," as he acknowledges in his letter to Coit