Characters from the Gold Plates

[_rcrocket]

Moreover, it appears Anthon or Harris have the chronology mixed up. Harris says he first went to Anthon and then to Mitchell (Mitchell then being Anthon's superior); Anthon says Harris went first to Mitchell who then shunted him off to Anthon.

Anthon, who had read Harris' account, does not catch this difference and does not call Harris on it.

[_guy sajer]

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.

True enough. Of all the gullible fools who were conned by Joseph Smith, Harris was easily one of the most gullible and one of the biggest fools.

[_SatanWasSetUp]

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.

Admittedly that is strange, but Harris was a strange duck. It could be that Anthon dismissed the "caractors" in more polite terms than he later recalled. Sometimes we think we've been perfectly clear with someone, but they still didn't get it. Maybe Anthon said something polite like "hmm, interesting" when he first saw the "caractors" and that's what Harris remembers, Anthon showing some interest in them. Who knows why Harris misinterpreted Anthon's dismissal of the caractors.

Another question is why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" anyway when Reformed Egyptian was unknown to anyone but Nephites, and could only be translated with the Urim and Thummim?

[_Who Knows]

Another question is why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" anyway when Reformed Egyptian was unknown to anyone but Nephites, and could only be translated with the Urim and Thummim?

Another question - why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" when he simply made them up?

[_SatanWasSetUp]

Another question is why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" anyway when Reformed Egyptian was unknown to anyone but Nephites, and could only be translated with the Urim and Thummim?

Another question - why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" when he simply made them up?

Another good question. Obviously the learned did not buy off on his characters being genuine, so why did he do it? To get Harris to mortgage his farm. It was a gamble, and it paid off, I suppose.

[_jhammel]

Another question is why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" anyway when Reformed Egyptian was unknown to anyone but Nephites, and could only be translated with the Urim and Thummim?

Another question - why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" when he simply made them up?

Here are some links to information concerning a discovered manuscript for which Dr. Mitchill was also consulted, and which - as you'll see - others have posited some type of connection to the Book of Mormon.

http://www.sidneyrigdon.com/dbroadhu/MI ... htm#030723
http://olivercowdery.com/smithhome/2000s/2001RBSt.htm
http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/saga/saga02b.htm
http://solomonspalding.com/SRP/saga/saga02c.htm

I don't know if these help answer the question, but they may provide clues (or on the other hand, perhaps they are totally useless).

Jeff

[_jhammel]

For some reason, I think I remember reading or having it pointed out to me that Harris's account of these events wasput to print at a time when Harris was not with the church, and that the account was actually written by Smith or someone else - implying that it is not necessarily the events as Harris himself had recalled.

Does anyone know where this account was first published, or if there is known to be a handwritten account, and by whom and when?

Thanks.

Jeff

[_John Larsen]

Another question is why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" anyway when Reformed Egyptian was unknown to anyone but Nephites, and could only be translated with the Urim and Thummim?

Another question - why would Joseph Smith have the characters examined by "the learned" when he simply made them up?

Because either way he was set. If the guy said they were real...well there you go. If he said they were fake, the whole prophecy business. If you can predict your own errors, you are obviously a prophet.

[_Blixa]

That is a lovely version of the broadside, phaedrus ut, and just what I was looking for. Much thanks.

[_Doctor Steuss]

That is a lovely version of the broadside, phaedrus ut, and just what I was looking for. Much thanks.

Speaking of which:

Just who is the "aged Indian"? Does anyone know if there is another (better) source for his little statement? For some reason I think I may have read it in E Smith's VotH, but I'm not sure...


... if it is indeed from VotH, it would be interesting to find out who produced the little ad-dilly. (*winkety, wink*)