You know, I am looking right now at a curious book, which recently I came into possession of. Curious because it is a handmade book, consisting mostly of newpaper clippings pasted to blank sheets of paper (much like a scrapbook) along with some personal photos and such, the pages of which are all hand made paper, with rough edges (there are occaisionally a cut edge, but only seeming to have been cut to reduce the page size - the pages seem to have been individual and not cut from a larger sheet). At any rate, it was started in 1931, and completed in 1942, and is quite interesting as much of ites content deals with the great depression.
At any rate, one of the more interesting items (at least for me) in the book is a piece titled: "A Sheaf of Similes for 1930" containing a group of short sayings apprently published in 1930 by notable persons (some of whom are quite familiar). And one of those items seems rather pertinent to both sides of this discussion (some of them qre quite cute, some are quite racist, etc.):
"A plausibility is a near-truth, which, like near-beer, has the appearance but not the inherent excellence of the genuine article. - The Rev. John A. McClorey."
The problems with using parallels is that there is a line which is easy cross which pushes us into parallelomania. Verbal parallels of these sorts are always quite weak (as evidence) even though we often tend to see them as significant. The reasons are quite simple - it is a poor method which allows us to accept without qualification all evidence that supports a thesis while rejecting without qualification all evidence which doesn't.
In other words, we can always find parallels. Parallels exist by accident for a lot of reasons. Shared language is one of them. I have, for example, in my private collection a work by a certain early 19th century author named Morris Mattson. The novel is in two volumes and is named
Paul Ulrich, and it details, among other things robber bands. When we place this into some context, we might start looking at the parallels.
Volume 1, introduces the main character (and I note that we have two volumes, kind of like with Nephi's writings, yes?):
My name is Paul Ulric. Thus much, gentle reader, you already know of one whose history is about to be recorded for the benefit of the world.
(Compare 1 Nephi 1:1; 26:24; Jarom 1:2; also 1 Nephi 9 and similar passages)
He continues:
I have tasted of joy as well as of sorrow ... At one, moment I have been elevated to the very pinnacle of human happiness, at the next I have sunk to the lowest depths of despair. Still I fancied there was always an equilibrium. This may seem a strange philosophy to some, but is it the less true?
(Compare 2 Nephi 2 esp. vs. 13). And what is the single event which defines the life of Paul Ulrich's Father?
for merely picking up and carrying home his Majesty King George the Fourth, whom Mr. U. assures us upon his word and honor, his father found lying beastly drunk, one fine day, in some gutter, in some particular thoroughfare of London.
(Compare 1 Nephi 4:7-8). Due to this incident "he was threatened with an indictment for treason!" his father, determines upon visiting the United States, and taking his family with him. (Compare 1 Nephi 1:20-2:2).
Ulrich introduces us formally to his two sisters Eleanor and Rosaline. This introduction is to little purpose since we never hear of them again (as with Nephi's sisters, who, once married to Ishmael's sons, vanish).
And, of course, Paul develops a rapid proficiency in Latin, Greek, Hebrew, music, dancing, and fencing. (Nephi was taught in all the learning of his father). And this first paragraph (we are still in the first paragraph of the book) concludes with a solemn assurance that we are perishable creatures, and that it is very possible we may all die which of coruse is reflected in many passages in the Book of Mormon e.g. 2 Nephi 9:6.
Then we get passages like this:
Dame Lawler paused, and turning upon me her glaring and blood-shot eyes exclaimed "Do you think there is a punishment hereafter for the evil deeds done in the body?"
"Such," I replied, "the divines have long taught us."
"Then is my destroyer writhing in the agonies of hell!!"
Compare this, for example to Alma - esp. Alma 9:28. More significant perhaps is the notion of the "agonies of hell" which seems to translate into the "pains of hell" in the Book of Mormon.) After this, things really start to get interesting. Paul Ulric encounters the bands of robbers in and around Philadelphia. Miss Emily Florence (the love interest) explains this momentous occurrence.
There is a band of robbers who have their retreat in the neighboring hills-and this was no doubt one of them. They are headed by a brave and reckless fellow of the name of Elmo - Captain Elmo I think they call him. They have been the terror of the inhabitants for a long time. My father went out sometime ago with an armed force in pursuit of them, but could not discover their hiding place. I have heard it said that they steal away the children of wealthy parents that they may exact a ransom.
For fun, I though I would actually provide a couple of Book of Mormon passages for comparison:
(3 Nephi 4:1) And it came to pass that in the latter end of the eighteenth year those armies of robbers had prepared for battle, and began to come down and to sally forth from the hills, and out of the mountains, and the wilderness, and their strongholds, and their secret places, and began to take possession of the lands, both which were in the land south and which were in the land north, and began to take possession of all the lands which had been deserted by the Nephites, and the cities which had been left desolate.
And
(Helaman 11:25) And they did commit murder and plunder; and then they would retreat back into the mountains, and into the wilderness and secret places, hiding themselves that they could not be discovered, receiving daily an addition to their numbers, inasmuch as there were dissenters that went forth unto them.
Perhaps we should add:
(Helaman 2:4) For there was one Gadianton, who was exceedingly expert in many words, and also in his craft, to carry on the secret work of murder and of robbery; therefore he became the leader of the band of Kishkumen.
And for kicks, how about
(Helaman 11:22-23) And it came to pass that thus ended this year. And the robbers did still increase and wax strong, insomuch that they did defy the whole armies of the Nephites, and also of the Lamanites; and they did cause great fear to come unto the people upon all the face of the land. Yea, for they did visit many parts of the land, and did do great destruction unto them; yea, did kill many, and did carry away others captive into the wilderness, yea, and more especially their women and their children.
The love interest is kidnapped, and not able to raise the ransom, Paul attempts to join the band of robbers to secure her freedom. His initiation into the robber band is a process (which is worth reading in its entirety), has several steps. In one of them, Ulric is led into a room:
I looked wildly and fearfully around-but no living object was perceptible. Before me stood an altar, hung about with red curtains, and ornamented with fringe of the same color. Above it, on a white Banner, was a painting of the human heart, with a dagger struck to the hilt, and the blood streaming from the wound. Directly under this horrible device, was written, in large letters,
THE PUNISHMENT OF THE UNFAITHFUL.
Around, wherever I turned my eyes, there was little else to be seen but skeletons of human bodies-with their arms uplifted, and stretching forward-suspended in every direction from the walls. One of them I involuntarily touched, and down it came with a fearful crash -- its dry bones rattling upon the granite floor, until the whole cavern reverberated with the sound. I turned from this spectacle, and opposite beheld a guillotine -- the fatal axe smeared with blood; and near it was a head-looking as if it had just been severed from the body-with the countenance ghastly -- the lips parted -- and the eyes staring wide open. There, also, was the body, covered, however, with a cloth, so that little was seen except the neck, mangled and bloody, and a small portion of the hand, hanging out from its shroud, grasping in its fingers a tablet with the following inscription:
THE END OF THE BETRAYER.
When he is brought before the assembled robbers, he describes them as:
Their garments were hanging in shreds-an emblem, perhaps, of their own desperate pursuits. Their faces were daubed with paint of various colors, which gave them a wild and fiendish aspect.
This of course instantly reminded me of 3 Nephi 4:7:
And it came to pass that they did come up to battle; and it was in the sixth month; and behold, great and terrible was the day that they did come up to battle; and they were girded about after the manner of robbers; and they had a lamb-skin about their loins, and they were dyed in blood, and their heads were shorn, and they had head-plates upon them; and great and terrible was the appearance of the armies of Giddianhi, because of their armor, and because of their being dyed in blood.
Interesting, yes?
At any rate, we can go on, and on. But to be perfectly clear on the point - I own a large collection of early 19th century literature (it's kind of a hobby for me). We could with relatively few manuscripts, produce exact duplicates of nearly all of the unique 3 and 4 and 5 word locutions in the Book of Mormon. And in fact, we could do this for any early 19th century text. When you use the same language (early 19th century american english), when you cover similar topics (salvation, robbers, wars, etc), you are going to end up with significant overlap. So at some point, we have to question whether or not a list of parallels really means anything at all.
Why would Joseph incorporate these specific elements? What is the intention of the author of the Book of Mormon is using these themes? Is it intentional mimesis? Is he merely drawing on another source for a structure because he hasn't the creativity to come up with it himself? How common are the elements in similar narratives? And what do we do with the differences? If we apply this same kind of criteria to other texts (including those that come after the publication of the Book of Mormon) are we willing to make the same kinds of claims?
This is the problem with this kind of methodology and discussion. Listing parallels may seem quite convincing on the surface - but, as anyone who has done a lot of work on texts and intertextuality will notice, these kinds of parallels don't really mean a whole lot. There has to be a way to gauge significance and relevance. We expect some similarities - even if the texts are compeltely unrelated - so the argument has to be much more specific than to simply say here are some similarities - there must be reliance.
Ben McGuire