Characters from the Gold Plates

[_rcrocket]

Anthon fairly quickly denounced Martin Harris and contradicted Harris’ story with letters. Anthon was a very well known classicist.

However, Anthon’s description of what he was shown has problems. He told E.D. Howe in 1834 that what he was shown “ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calender.” He told Reverend Coit a few years later in 1841: “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 unskilfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac.”

None of these descriptions matches the scrap of paper in the above thread. That scrap came from David Whitmer in 1887, long after Whitmer left the Church.

[_Phaedrus Ut]

Anthon fairly quickly denounced Martin Harris and contradicted Harris’ story with letters. Anthon was a very well known classicist.

However, Anthon’s description of what he was shown has problems. He told E.D. Howe in 1834 that what he was shown “ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calender.” He told Reverend Coit a few years later in 1841: “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 unskilfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac.”

None of these descriptions matches the scrap of paper in the above thread. That scrap came from David Whitmer in 1887, long after Whitmer left the Church.

Yes but there are other extant example of Book of Mormon characters that match the Anthon transcript. I can understand you wanting to search for a way to discredit such obvious gibberish but you can't discount the others. For example my example above from Fredrick G Williams, Joseph Scribe, that also includes the revelation now D&C 7.

* In the LDS Church archives in Salt Lake City is an undated page in Oliver Cowdery's hand that is identified, similar to the Anthon transcript in the Community of Christ archives, as Characters on the Book of Mormon. It contains four symbols not present on the Anthon transcript. But equally view as gibberish by Egyptologists.

Phaedrus

*this is the document I mentioned in my earlier post that I would like a image of. If someone has it I would appreciate it.

[_jhammel]

Anthon fairly quickly denounced Martin Harris and contradicted Harris’ story with letters. Anthon was a very well known classicist.

However, Anthon’s description of what he was shown has problems. He told E.D. Howe in 1834 that what he was shown “ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calender.” He told Reverend Coit a few years later in 1841: “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 unskilfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac.”

None of these descriptions matches the scrap of paper in the above thread. That scrap came from David Whitmer in 1887, long after Whitmer left the Church.

That is correct. And due to the discrepancies, I don't think this document is the same one that Harris took to New York, even though Whitmer was under the impression that it was the same one. Whitmer also thought he had the dictated manuscript of the Book of Mormon (not knowing he really had the printers manuscript), but he was shown to be wrong about that. If a separate document, then the document taken to Anthon may have contained some or all of the same characters, but who knows? In any event, this document is still a demonstration of Book of Mormon characters in Joseph's handwriting that ended up in Whitmer's hands likely from through other friendly sources (most likely Cowdery, from whom he received the printers manuscript), or from Joseph himself.

[_rcrocket]

Anthon fairly quickly denounced Martin Harris and contradicted Harris’ story with letters. Anthon was a very well known classicist.

However, Anthon’s description of what he was shown has problems. He told E.D. Howe in 1834 that what he was shown “ended in a rude delineation of a circle divided into various compartments, decked with various strange marks, and evidently copied after the Mexican Calender.” He told Reverend Coit a few years later in 1841: “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 unskilfulness or from actual design, were intermingled with sundry delineations of half moons, stars, and other natural objects, and the whole ended in a rude representation of the Mexican zodiac.”

None of these descriptions matches the scrap of paper in the above thread. That scrap came from David Whitmer in 1887, long after Whitmer left the Church.

Yes but there are other extant example of Book of Mormon characters that match the Anthon transcript. I can understand you wanting to search for a way to discredit such obvious gibberish but you can't discount the others. For example my example above from Fredrick G Williams, Joseph Scribe, that also includes the revelation now D&C 7.

* In the LDS Church archives in Salt Lake City is an undated page in Oliver Cowdery's hand that is identified, similar to the Anthon transcript in the Community of Christ archives, as Characters on the Book of Mormon. It contains four symbols not present on the Anthon transcript. But equally view as gibberish by Egyptologists.

Phaedrus

*this is the document I mentioned in my earlier post that I would like a image of. If someone has it I would appreciate it.

My post sought neither to discredit nor credit anything, except to suggest that either Anthon is lying or forgetful, or Whitmer is lying or forgetful.

[_antishock8]

Hey look. Reformed Egyptian:

:( (:) |) +:l O:): (8 : 8{ (o)(o) (x) :P(I) /><\

[_Phaedrus Ut]

My post sought neither to discredit nor credit anything, except to suggest that either Anthon is lying or forgetful, or Whitmer is lying or forgetful.

Ok I see what you mean. I don't see Anthon supposed confirmation or discrediting of Martin Harris' document as important the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon characters can now be examined and authenticated on their own merit. But I suppose the story is important to the historical folklore of the church.

In my eyes the whole episode becomes clearer when you imagine a scholar humoring what he called "a plain, apparently simple-hearted farmer" and a enthusiastic believer seeking confirmation for both the Golden Plates and Joseph Smith.


Phaedrus

[_Bryan Inks]

Did anyone else catch this from the FAIR Article that TruthDancer posted?

Jones also compared the Anthon transcript signs to some found on another clay seal excavated at the famous Olmec site of La Venta, Tabasco.9 The characters on the La Venta artifact are much simpler than those on the one from Tlatilco, hence the comparisons are less interesting. Nevertheless Jones determined that he could see parallels between all the La Venta signs and those on the Anthon transcript.

How could this be possible? Given that the Olmecs are supposedly the Jaredites, who spoke pure Adamic according to timelines.

Reformed Egyptian, created hundreds of years later, somehow has enough similarities to Adamic that some quack can, from memory, claim that they are similar?

[_Doctor Steuss]

The following was written by Fredrick G Williams who was Joseph's scribe from 1833 to 1837. <snippity doo-dah>
*This is an enhanced image compared to what Steuss posted above

This is really cool Phaedrus. Thank you!

Is the Character handwriting that of Smith or Williams (or is there even anyway to tell)? Do you know where the Characters were taken from, as they don’t seem (at least I can’t see them) to come from the Anthon transcript?

[_rcrocket]

My post sought neither to discredit nor credit anything, except to suggest that either Anthon is lying or forgetful, or Whitmer is lying or forgetful.

Ok I see what you mean. I don't see Anthon supposed confirmation or discrediting of Martin Harris' document as important the authenticity of the Book of Mormon. The Book of Mormon characters can now be examined and authenticated on their own merit. But I suppose the story is important to the historical folklore of the church.

In my eyes the whole episode becomes clearer when you imagine a scholar humoring what he called "a plain, apparently simple-hearted farmer" and a enthusiastic believer seeking confirmation for both the Golden Plates and Joseph Smith.


Phaedrus

The mystery of it all is Harris' reaction. After being supposedly shunted away by Mitchell (Anthon's version; too bad Mitchell was dead by 1834) and ridiculed by Anthon, Harris makes up an entirely different story about what Anthon said, mortgaged his farm, lost his family, remained in penury his entire life, and never recanted what he had been told. This is one of the miracles or absurdities, depending upon how you look at it, of the witnesses.

[_Runtu]

The mystery of it all is Harris' reaction. After being supposedly shunted away by Mitchell (Anthon's version; too bad Mitchell was dead by 1834) and ridiculed by Anthon, Harris makes up an entirely different story about what Anthon said, mortgaged his farm, lost his family, remained in penury his entire life, and never recanted what he had been told. This is one of the miracles or absurdities, depending upon how you look at it, of the witnesses.

I agree with you, Bob. Judging from interviews with Martin Harris, he seems a rather credulous sort, but I don't know how to explain his reaction to Anthon. If the characters we have today are at all representative of those on the plates, Anthon would not have been able to give an opinion as to the translation but would have been able to point out that the characters were not of apparent Middle Eastern origin. So, why would Harris come home satisfied that the characters were "true"? It's a mystery to me.