The Return of Moroni? or, RLDS Conference 1895

[_Mary]

It's another one of those pieces of evidence (from 2 sources I see) that might have made me wonder about the literal nature of the story of the plates a little sooner than I did.
I trusted my seminary teachers were giving me the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Obviously my trust was misplaced.

This thread has led me to investigate James Strang a little more. He's quite the character and not someone I knew much about other than he apostatized from the church to set up his own group. His behaviour is interesting for me because it seems that he more than anyone tried to continue Joseph Smith's legacy in a literal sense.

Thanks Dale for initiating such an interesting thread.

Lots of great questions. You seem to know just which questions to ask and hopefully someone will investigate them.

[_MCB]

he more than anyone tried to continue Joseph Smith's legacy in a literal sense.

Agreed. The Straneites were very open about the more bizarre beliefs. http://signaturebooks.com/2010/02/god-h ... t-mormons/ is good, and funny.

[_palerobber]

thanks for posting.

i had just recently been reading Salisbury to compare her recollection of the Moroni visits with Joseph Knight Sr.'s account. they both agree that Moroni (whom Knight never names but only calls "the personage") instructed Joseph to bring along Alvin, and later Emma, on subsequent visits to the hill.

[_Kishkumen]

thanks for posting.

i had just recently been reading Salisbury to compare her recollection of the Moroni visits with Joseph Knight Sr.'s account. they both agree that Moroni (whom Knight never names but only calls "the personage") instructed Joseph to bring along Alvin, and later Emma, on subsequent visits to the hill.

I always thought it was interesting that the Smiths denied digging up Alvin.

Perhaps a piece of Alvin did go to the hill, or at least something buried with him.

[Guest]

Perhaps a piece of Alvin did go to the hill, or at least something buried with him.

it really doesn't seem that far fetched, given the context.

both Knight and Salisbury say Alvin died after the request was made to bring him to the next visit. so....
Nov 1823 - Alvin dies.
Sep 22, 1824 - Joseph was to bring Alvin to the hill.
Sep 25, 1824 - Joseph Sr. submits a notice to the newspaper (published Sep 30) explaining why he'd exhumed Alvin "this morning".

no one disputes that Joseph Sr. dug up the body of his son who'd been buried for nearly a year to find out whether it had been mutilated (as rumor had it). why would it be so strange for someone capable of doing that to instead have dug up that same body in order to obtain, for example, a lock of hair or some other token?

[_Kishkumen]

Yup! Thanks for refreshing my memory. I think the exhumation was to procure a token from Alvin to take to the hill.

Consider the possible Masonic significance. If you think of Alvin as a Hiram Abiff figure, then the Grand Key Word, is procured by raising him from the grave. Mahabin.

[_Yoda]

Yup! Thanks for refreshing my memory. I think the exhumation was to procure a token from Alvin to take to the hill.

Consider the possible Masonic significance. If you think of Alvin as a Hiram Abiff figure, then the Grand Key Word, is procured by raising him from the grave. Mahabin.

That is very interesting.

[_Kishkumen]

In the linked article, the author quotes Alvin's final words to Joseph: "Be faithful in receiving instruction, and in keeping every commandment that is given to you...."

Hmmm....

Another thought: no mention is made by Alvin of the commandment that he was to have accompanied him to the hill on the next visit. Hoffman erroneously dated this instruction to after Alvin's death in order to work in the necromancy angle that the 1824 Smith Sr. notice tries to quell. It makes more sense for Joseph to have received the instruction before Alvin's passing, hence the necessity for exhumation. I seem to recall that Joseph wore Alvin's clothes to the hill so he could serve as a fitting substitute for his brother. All of this is from vague memory, so I could be wrong on the details.

[_Kishkumen]

Richard Lloyd Anderson wrote about the rumors regarding Alvin in the wake of the Hoffmann forgery scandal:

Alvin in Palmyra Traditions

Another falsehood generated by the Salamander Letter is the idea that the Smiths considered exhuming Alvin’s body so Joseph could take it to Cumorah and fulfill the angel’s instructions. In discussing the roots of this strange idea, we need to remember that all historical sources are not created equal. It is not enough to quote a Palmyra “source” without asking whether some form of bias is distorting the recollection—and if so, how much and why. One obvious way to rank sources is to list them chronologically. Early information would be preferred, if it is direct and without severe prejudice.

The oldest source dealing with community rumors about Alvin comes from Joseph Smith, Sr. Almost a year after Alvin died, Father Smith ran a public notice five times in the Palmyra weekly, answering falsehoods about Alvin’s body. The vigorous correction of slander by the family head shows why community statements on the Smiths should not be trusted without substantiation:

“TO THE PUBLIC: Whereas reports have been industriously put in circulation that my son Alvin had been removed from the place of his interment and dissected; … therefore, for the purpose of ascertaining the truth of such reports, I, with some of my neighbors this morning, repaired to the grave, and removing the earth, found the body, which had not been disturbed. This method is taken for the purpose of satisfying the minds of those who may have heard the report, and of informing those who have put it in circulation, that it is earnestly requested they would desist therefrom.” After questioning the motives of rumor mongers, the printed signature of “Joseph Smith” closed the advertisement-notice. 23

Why did this gossip target the Smiths? General religious prejudice against the Smiths has been noted by many historians, but the problem has a tighter focus when we see the timing of this public notice. Father Smith penned his protest on 25 September 1824, three days after Joseph’s second visit to the hill, saying that the grave was opened and Alvin’s body located “this morning.” 24 So gossip about exhuming Alvin’s body was highest a year after Joseph’s 1823 visit to the hill, the time when, according to the angel’s instructions, Joseph was to bring Alvin. Apparently, word had circulated of Joseph’s instructions, and the false rumor was being spread that the Smiths had dug up—or would dig up—the corpse to fulfill the instructions. Father Smith was evidently pained that the family would be accused of such procedures, and so he took the action necessary to correct the rumor.

Scholars should not underestimate how rumor, speculation, and sarcasm erode true history. A clear example concerning the Smith family is furnished by the newspaperman and regional historian Orsamus Turner, who was slightly older than Joseph Smith, Jr., and knew him as a boy.

With heavy satire, Turner portrays Alvin as carrying the religious hopes of the family. Alvin, he says, was “originally intended, or designated, by fireside consultations, and solemn and mysterious outdoor hints, as the forthcoming Prophet.” What Turner really means in his satirical narrative is unclear, but no serious source names Alvin as anything but an assistant to Joseph. Turner mixes nine parts parody to one part history: “Alvah … eat too many green turnips, sickened and died.” As will be seen, this rough-shod view of an agonizing family tragedy merely shows how unfit many were to write anything about the Restoration. Indeed, Turner closes his guide to LDS origins justifying his levity “because it will admit of no other treatment.” 25

This spirit of sarcasm and love of exaggeration were rampant in Palmyra, as is evidenced by the community’s support of the Reflector, a weekly newspaper that ran a year and a half with little else than caricature, including regular mockery of Mormonism. 26 Out of this environment of ridicule has come about forty statements from those who claimed to know the Smiths. The problem is that most of these statements came from memory, years after the events took place. Without early documentation, it is impossible to verify them. In fact, a close look at what passes for memory suggests that tradition mingled freely with recollection in these statements.

Alvin is notably absent in most of these reports, except when listed as a member of the family or mentioned as in demand as a hard worker. He made no lasting impact on community memory as a religious leader, though he was included in one detailed money-digging tale evidently intended to suggest that magical activities were involved somehow in finding the Book of Mormon.

This tale comes from Lorenzo Saunders, one of three sons of Enoch Saunders, who died in 1825. The eldest, Orlando, was born in 1803 and took over his father’s farm, not far from the Smith’s. Two younger brothers grew up in Palmyra and later moved to Michigan. One was Lorenzo, born in 1811, and the other was Benjamin, born in 1814. 27 Both Lorenzo and Benjamin mention Alvin, though one should be cautious about specifics: at Alvin’s death, Lorenzo was twelve and Benjamin nine. In fact, Benjamin’s only memory of Alvin is understandably general: “Oldest boy was Alvin—died. I remember when he died.” 28

Lorenzo’s story about Alvin shows a suspicious coincidence of memory and family stories. In 1884, Lorenzo said: “Willard Chase told me about a place; he said he and Alvin Smith went there to dig, and there was a chest. … And he said they dug down, and it only lay a little under the ground. I says, how did this shovel become broken up like that, and Willard Chase then told me. He says, Alvin and I went down and found that chest.” 29 Something told second-hand sixty years after the fact is less verified history than it is vague memory. Furthermore, those who try to tie this account to the Book of Mormon are grasping at straws, because the story is not given in a Book of Mormon context.

There are several examples of major weaknesses in Lorenzo’s memory: “Now I can tell you what he told to our house respecting this revelation that he had in the very commencement before Alvin died, his brother. Sometime before this he claimed he saw the angel, and that he was notified of these plates and all that—and the time would be made known to him, but it was not at that time made known to him, but he must take his older brother and go to the spot, and he could obtain them. Before that time his oldest brother died. Jo Smith got that revelation a year or two before that. I don’t know as I can tell you what year Alvin died in; it was in the summer before Alvin died he told it at our house.” 30

This rambling recollection six decades after the fact misses on chronology, for the early Knight and Chase reports say the instruction to bring Alvin was given at the first Cumorah visit on 22 September 1823, whereas in this quote Lorenzo projects back the instruction to bring Alvin “a year or two” before his death. But the first time Joseph was visited by the angel was on 21 September 1823, only two months before Alvin died. This lack of precision is a serious problem in Saunders’ statements claiming to give Joseph’s inside story years after a single hearing of the Prophet’s account.

But perhaps the major weakness in Lorenzo’s information is that it is not entirely a first-hand account. Many details obviously come from the debunker, Willard Chase, who had married Lorenzo’s older sister. 31 This Chase connection is significant in several “memories” in the Saunders’ statements, for they are found in only one other original document—their brother-in-law’s affidavit. 32 Over the years, Chase undoubtedly told his brothers-in-law of his interview with Joseph, Sr., and his affidavit, printed in 1834, was certainly available to the family. Lorenzo Saunders’ account of the command to bring Alvin to the hill could very easily be based on either or both of these sources, leading us to suspect that his “first-hand” account is really a mix of personal memory and family tradition.

[_Kishkumen]

It should be remembered that Anderson is understandably spooked by the forgery and thus his inclination is to swing hard in the direction of trying to discredit the sources of the Salamander Letter's ideas too. I remain interested in the role of Alvin before his death.